Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Can Linux do Video Conferencing?
Happy New Year!
Ed Schlunder wrote in with 1999's first
Ask Slashdot. He asks:
"Our school district is playing with the
idea of video conferencing and I'm
wondering if this can be done on Linux.
My home computer has a bttv card and a
full duplex sound card. This should be the
necessary hardware for doing video conferencing.
On the software side, Linux supports IP
Multicast and IGMP, so the kernel seems
to be up to the task. But what about the
actual video compression and distribution system?
So far, everything I've looked at seems about
1-2 years old and no longer maintained
(vic,
nv, etc). Is there a cross platform
video conferencing application out there
for Linux that is actively maintained?"
The school is currently looking into
Microsoft NetMeeting, but Ed worries (and
rightly so) that Microsoft might be positioning
itself to dominate in this market, allowing them
to determine the standards later on.
What do you all say?
Remember, that more of Ask Slashdot can be found
here
! 1998 was a good first year, and I'm
hoping that we can help more folks with
their nagging questions in 1999!
The Corel Netwinder series of computers have video in and out, and I think they mention video conferencing. Also, if you got Netwinders everything would be pre-configured, right? Maybe Corel should advertise to schools!
As someone who used to work for a company doing
work in T.120 and H.323 let me just say that:
1) MS has already "Spyglassed" several small
companies into giving up their tech in this area.
2) NetMeeting follows the usual "embrace and extend"
model in that it follows just enough of the
standard to make it work w/ other NetMeetings
but not enough to make it work well with other
client apps.
I have been wondering if Linux could do video conferencing my self, and I have heard that qcan is usable under Linux, but not sure how good it is. I once posted a question to ask slashdot and heard nothing. I'd love to know what Linux can do as far as video conferencng goes, and which hardware is the best etc....
I have also been thinking lately that now that Netscape is virtually out of the picture that M$ can start determining the standards of the internet, video compression, and whatever the hell they want pretty much. That is unfortuanately scary.....................
You could find IVS at www.inria.fr/rodeo/ivs.html
or Q-SeeMe at www.pangea.org/~mavilar/qseeme/qseeme.html
Or check out conferencing dir @ metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/apps
Did you forget to mention that you also need a
camera?
DS
OK, if someone here can help me it would be seriously appreciated, as this is the last thing keeping me from using Linux full-time. I can't get QSeeMe .83b to receive videos on the reflectors, I can send video, but I cannot receive video, I open someone's window and it stays eternally black. Now, when I direct connect with someone, I can send/receive video just fine.
As a side note for others, I use a Color Quickcam 2, and Patrick Reynolds' gtkcam/xcqcam package. Patrick has done an excellent job, and I've even annoyed him via email with stupid questions a long while back, and he answered them. I don't think there's anything better than his package but if there is, maybe leave a comment here.
I know QSeeMe works for some people, so someone PLEASE PLEASE help me.
philth@lefthandshake.org
Dear Cliff,
Ed tried to ask a serious question. Why did you have to add that little note to the article where you say:
>The school is currently looking into Microsoft
>NetMeeting, but Ed worries (and rightly so) that
>Microsoft might be positioning itself to
>dominate in this market, allowing them to
>determine the standards later on.
This addition is absolutely not needed in the context of his question. It is food for a anti MS flamewar instead of a serious answer to this important question that Ed asks.
Stop the childish Microsoft bashing please. Comments like this make slashdot sound like it's being run by teenage Linux doodz (or is it?) who are all on a holy war against Microsoft.
I think everybody with posting rights should stop putting ANY remarks about Microsoft in articles where it's not needed. Let's keep a professional level in the content of Slashdot.
Slashdot is an excellent place to show the world that the UNIX world in general, not just Linux (yes there are other Unices!), is a very professional and fast moving place.
We should try to uplift the general idea the public has about UNIX in general instead of bashing everything else.
Greetings,
Stefan (@sateh.com)
Theres a package called "Pulp Vision" which you can find at my ftp site (forget where the original is) at my FTP site which was designed for Linux and does send/receive video and sound. It isn't compatible with other H323 stacks though because the actual H.323 protocol isn't implmemented fully (although it does use the proper compression schemes, so most of the work is already there.
so that shouldn't be an issue. If anyone has it working can they post a comment here, with their hardware/net connection? I have 640kbps DSL, it SHOULD work, heh.
philth@lefthandshake.org
I think Corel plans on using java for these things, as they have some java based techniques for conferincing. :(
Weird thing is that on their video conferencing site they only mention the win32 platform
DataDevil
(DataDevil was not found Y2K proof and will be shot 31st of december 1999)
well ofcourse they should bash microsoft
if it's a yugo, don't call it a mercedes
microsoft software is generally below standard, so it deserves to be bashed
For a list of general conferencing apps, go to:
m l
http://www.video.ja.net/mice/
UCL's rat is a working and currently maintained audio conferencing tool that has modes where it can attempt to play nice with the network.
Hardware-wise, you want an audio capture board capable of doing full duplex. I use the Creative Ensoniq AudioPCI.
LBL's vic is the video conferencing program of choice on the MBONE. Due to LBL anti-Linux bigotry, getting it running on Linux has tended to be significantly less than fun. Most of the random Linux ports are broken in some way or other, so you'll just have to hunt until you find one that works.
You need a video capture board and a video camera. I use the MiroMedia PCTV Pro, which I believe is discontinued. You might also use one of the Hauppague Win/TV boards. These are all Bt848 boards, and are supported by Video4Linux in the
2.1/2.2 kernels; more software info can be found at:
http://www.thp.uni-koeln.de/~rjkm/linux/bttv.ht
I use the video camera built into my Nokia monitor. It's not very good, but it gets the job done. The upshot for a school environment is that it's harder to steal or break them versus an external camera; the downside is that once the kids break them, you've got to fix the monitor instead of just swapping out some small camera. There are many $100-$200/each mini-cameras out there that are reasonable; you might want to go that route.
So the executive summary is: You can do video conferencing on Linux, and it's not too expensive. It is not completely straightforward, though.
If anyone bashes Microsoft it is out of fear and ignorance. Fear that they will dominate markets and make them incompatible. Ignorant that everything Microsoft makes is trash. Believe it or not, Microsoft is pretty descent at designing user interfaces. And a pet peve of mine is Bill Gates bashing. Bashing a multimillion dollar company is one thing, bashing one individual is cruel. Bill Gates is busy protecting his and his company's intrests which is one reason he is CEO.
If you want to bash microsoft products, do it for real, solid, FACTUAL reasons. I understand some people are just playing around but I have the feeling that some are taking this seriously. If you want to bash something, bash it for it's merits. Doing otherwise would be childish.
Netscape out of the picture? Hardly my friend. Netscape is very close to unleashing the best browser the Internet has yet seen as far as compliance with HTML standards et al. Netscape is the better browser, it just has never had the resources that IE has had.
The Anonymous Coward
The
EFNet's Own...POPE Doommaker!
Absolutely. That's why I help with it.
I believe you are over reacting. What was stated does fit into the question. Many of the people here use Linux because they want to pump the breath of life through a Microsoft alternative. The reply poster was just saying here is a possible concern with a Microsoft solution.
Just like someone who is pro environment would like to know the environmental stance of the companies they do business with, so an Open Source person would like to know the future of any software they might use and whether it might change from being an open standard to one victimized by the embrace and extend philosophy of Microsoft.
On many other posts I would have gladly accepted your desire to stop the Microsoft bashing, be more professional, use good English, whatever. But, this is not one of them.
flame on
Hey... dont try and dictate to other slashdotters
as to what to do..
We doo BASH and mutilate Microsoft around here
And I am a granddad asshole.... wth over 35 years straight in first mainframes then micos CPM, then MicroSlut and then finally unix/linux...
Believe Microsoft DESERVE the bashing it gets around
here... as well as every bit of malice that can be thrown its shitty defrauding way
16 year olds indeed... no just some people with a little bit of integrity
Flame off
VIC and/or NVS seem to be pretty stable...
the question I have is more along the lines
of a performance issue... BSD os's is where a lot
of the video and audio action occurs at..
and buying the hardware that the software supports
seems to be the answer...
newer solutions such as video4linux may or may not be able to address this need on older 386/486 cpus, Pentiums 120 Mhz and up seem to have no issues...
cheers
anon
The Berkeley MASH toolkit contains maintained
copies of Vic and Vat and there is a
video4linux driver available for this source code.
http://mash.cs.berkeley.edu/mash/index.html
You can launch Vic and Vat with unicast addresses
if you don't currently have multicast.
Other stuff there too, recorders, reflectors, etc.
Stop the childish Microsoft bashing please. Comments like this make slashdot sound like it's
being run by teenage Linux doodz (or is it?) who are all on a holy war against Microsoft.
Uhhh.. duh. Slashdot IS being run by Linux doodz. What is your point? At least they don't create lies built into their articles like the "mainstream" computer press does ala ZD and CMP.
It is refreshing to hear someone take a stand against the tyranny of the Wintel monopoly once in awhile.
You know I was starting to feel that Win95 wasn't too bad until last night when I did something as trivial as close an app and suddenly I got a blue screen of death, then a blank screen where I could move the mouse around but nothing else, then "The computer is busy" blue screen, then eventually it just completely locked up and I didn't even get that. It is good to know Microsoft Windows hasn't changed. ;-)
Take a look at MARRATECH's communcation suite.
All tools are written i pure Java so they can be
run on all OS that got a JRE/JVM.
Marratech is a project at Centre for Distance-spanning Technology at Lule university Sweden, that have gone commercial, their mStar enviroment is still free, but if you plan to use
video conferencing in a big scale, I suggest take a look at MARRATECH enviroment.
Marratech
mStar
Centre for Distance-spanning Technology
>I think everybody with posting rights should stop putting ANY remarks about Microsoft in articles where it's not needed. Let's keep a professional
level in the content of Slashdot.
Granted, some of the comments here are childish, but the advantage is that you can spot them a mile away and ignore them.
Far better a bunch of unruly loudmouths, some of whom convey useful information, than the mainstream media which masquerades as "professional" experts. Case in point : ZD.
As for the topic of the question, I do think that MS's efforts are relevant. Not only will that person have to investigate Linux for video conferencing, but he'll undoubtedly have to deal with higher ups/what not when someone says, but what about Microsoft?
AC
(who's home computers are 100% MS free as of 1999)
I'm not sure what you mean by "million and one x windows variants".
I've heard of "W" and "Berlin", but this is far from million and one X variants (that is if you could call these an X variant).
Maybe you mean window managers?
It's really simple...
Microsoft products are bug-infested garbage that no one who knows of the superior alternatives would use, unless they were forced to, perhaps.
Some folks (like myself) think that letting them infest the schools with their crud will give them even more power. Ugh!
I had no problems getting it, after reading /.s announcement, I found it already mirrored on ftp.ru.kernel.org (de didnt have it, so I looked around...)
And its only 20k in size (patch, got it?) so it should be no problem for the so-(self-proclaimed)-called real testers to download it from whatever site has it already. I think theyre bright enough to try a few top-level domain names, if they cant get on their home mirror...
http://isabel.dit.upm.es :-)
not up right now but best of the best.
tested in largest word distributed events.
works with linux...
regards, dusan.
Qseeme works for about 10 seconds on the refs, receiving b/w video, it never receives mjpeg video, even though it claims to support it. After 10 seconds all the b/w video windows drop to 0 receive, that really sucks, as i dont have any ip masq stuff or anything
I'm still waiting for the two big hitters to actively support this market. I don't see PictureTel (with a HUGE installed base), and Intel making any attempt to port to Linux. Regarding Intel's product, the BVCS (Business Video Conferencing System) is a pretty comphresensive, but pricey system. Boards start at almost a thousand dollars. And whlie they work under NT/95/98, they don't exactly work well.
PictureTel has a huge legacy of ISA boards, that they are just recently converting to PCI. Again, they've also done some weird things to their codes to keep them compatible only with themselves. The truly sad part about this is when someone spec's out a VideoConferencing System, PictureTel is near the top of the list.
Anyone up for complaining, or simply writing drivers for the stuff?
Well, thank you all for your comments.
Unfortunatly you are all missing my point.
This is not about Microsoft being a monopolist or crappy Windows software. This is about Linux Public Relations. Yes I know that sounds scary, but think about it. We all want UNIX/Linux to be better, more advanced and more widely accepted. The technological part of that is being taken care of by excellent kernel and userland programmers, that's not the problem.
The PR however is created by the big Linux distributors and the Linux user community. Yes, that is you. You are responsible for creating the 'atmosphere' around Linux. If you want it to be succesful, then let it sound professional. Talk about it's advantages instead of the disadvantages of other solutions. Try to sound professional and stimulate development and thought about Linux and software developed for it. Bashing other solutions is in most cases a waste of time.
Slashdot is a highly regarded source of information for the Linux/UNIX community. Please do not abuse that. I know that it is not being run by industry professionals. That's okay, I just hope that they understand the power that they have with a site like this. It has great potential for putting the whole Linux/UNIX world on a higher level. We need that recognition in this world where everybody thinks that UNIX is a crappy 25 year old system that can't be used in the 90s.
Greetings,
Stefan
Before promoting linux as a video conferencing plaform I'd encourage the original poster to make sure they know what to objective and means of their high-school is. In general, the stuff available for Linux tends to be video/IP which is fine if all you want to do is shoot a few video streams across a low-utilization ethernet. But in general for video conferencing you don't have that kind of bandwidth, and the latency which IP packets experience across the public internet is not acceptable for two way interaction in a classroom environment.
P 64-1.2.2/ and http://www.fou.telenor.no/brukere/DVC/h263_softwar e/. The former URL is a mirror as the original site seems to only sometimes be there.)
I work with distance learning technology and we have found the minumum acceptable H.261 speed is 384Kbps, and this is over a dedicated (guaranteed throughput) ATM VCs or ISDN channels.
Linux may eventually find itself being used as a base for quality low-bandwith video conferencing. (What I would really like to see is an effort to make a multipoint conferencing bridge based on Linux.) There is already a good start on ATM network support for Linux. However on the H.26x/32x side of the game there are a lot of proprietary toes to be stepped on and no major companies would most likely dare put an implementation based on open source out on the market. So if it comes to be it will probably be solely a freeware thing.
If all the high school wants is one-way video or the occasional 3 or 4 person meeting, linux may have that already, and it would certainly be a lot more inexpensive than the higher quality solutions, which are only now dropping below the $10,000 mark. But right now if you really want to play in the distance learning arena you have to be prepared to pay -- hardware, ISDN line charges and multipoint bridge port charges are all very expensive (my job, incidentally involves building a private state wide network so that Massachusetts colleges and universities can cut these costs down as much as possible.)
(P.S. The links offered in this discussion are a gold mine of not-so-well-publicized projects. It's exciting to see that there's a lot more work going on in the H.26x area than I previously thought, being that most of the video I've seen for linux has been MPEG/JPEG based. But I would caution that developers need to look towards hooking their projects into the real-time microkernel because a video conferencing system that flakes out due to resource contention won't get very far. A couple links I'd like to add are to the p64 and tmn codecs at http://hpux.csc.liv.ac.uk/hppd/hpux/X11/Graphics/
You are right in many ways. I should broaden what I based on your reply. You are right in that it is fair to bash a monopolizing company who lets them reflect that in their products. There are probably other reasons to fairly bash microsoft as well. But you can tell when someone is hanging on edge. First off, if you bash Microsoft for something it has to be true. Thats what I mean by being childish. If someone says windows crashes every 2 hours they have never used windows for more than 2 hours (the number of hours is arbitrary).
But it still doesn't justify bashing Gates. Microsoft is a vast multi-national corporation. Saying that Gates is responsible for all of it is absurd. There may be a number of areas that Gates doesn't have any power over. At least not directly. At least spred the blame to more people in general and less people specificly. Okay, say it with me now, "shared responsibilty."
It is easy to find all the things any company has done wrong and then label it bad. Even though I personally feel Microsoft owes the software industry a big apology, it has done somethings right (i am taking a leap of faith here). We call this "perspective".
As far as taking it too seriously, whoever made the Bill Gates is Satan might be taking this all too seriously. If he goes to church everyday and talks to his preacher about Gates vs God he really needs to look around. I admit this is an extreme. Lets say you want to launch Win98 on a rocket. Hopefully most of the people who did this, did it for fun and not out of hatred. For those who did do it out of hatred whats next, assasination?
What I am saying is that let's not be immature about bashing. People who read what we say when we talk of the merits of Linux and the problems of Windows may take a second look at their current OS. But if they read, "Microsoft sucks because they make Windows that takes 3 gigs of hard drive and crashes all the time." they would think, "Well they must not of used Windows before and they probably don't know what they are talking about." Then they think that we are children and as you so etiquely stated, the world doesn't listen to children.
Of course there is nothing wrong with World Domination : )
(and by the way. I am 16 years old and reject the idea that all the idiot posts are by teen-agers. this is the kind of stereotyping that makes people associate Linux users with radicals)
I think the problem you running into is that
Q-SeeMe only supports a few of the many video
co/decs that CU-SeeMe supports.
Keep trying, I usually can view images from about
30% of the users at most reflectors.
This all sounds great, I shot straight to the site
to start downloading the whole thing... but found
only MS-Windows-95 and MS-Windows-NT software
there. This does not help the person who was
asking for Linux videoconferencing apps.
Someone posted a similar question to comp.os.linux.advocacy a few weeks ago. I was cruising cws.internet.com when I found something called Streamworks by Xing. It is apparently capable of acceptable streaming audio and mediocre streaming video.
Proving once again that a PhD doesn't necessarily make one smart/intelligent/master of his environment/well adjusted tool using primate with an opposable thumb/etc.
Let's see... which would you prefer :
A comfortable tenure at a well respected university, repsect of my peers and a good upper-middle class income, that fuzzy warm feeling in your gut knowing that you have made a contribution and a difference...
OR
Being the richest man on the planet?
bet the check marks go in the greedy bastard box. If you don't have the respect of your peers... fuck it... you can always have them killed
or buy their little start-ups and flush them down the shitter...
Absolute power corrupts absolutely for a reason... called human nature... and not because it is inherently evil.
I must say that as someone who also works for a school division that a better solution is to deny the division a Video Conferencing solution.
Where I am, every school division now has a number of 'Virtually Schooled' students. Many of these schools are not trying video conferencing and I have no idea why. It simply doesn't aid in education at all.
Now I'm sure there are some rare contexts (eduction or non-education) where VC could be useful. I can't think of any though.
Why not find out what goal they are trying to achieve and identify some non-video related requirements for meeting that goal.
I was recently asked to outline a proposal for an 'innovation grant' and was asked specifically to include Video Conferencing. I didn't do it, I sat down with the superintendent and explained why Video Conferencing doesn't work (I've worked with a few other schools/divisions that have tried and failed at great expense and one that has succeeded also at great expense). Instead I outlined a proposal to create a media-lab for producing a variety of digital media including video. After I explained how it could be used to meet his goals the superintendent was very pleased and more excited about the media-lab!
Just by your post you probably tripled the anti-M$ comments as well as offended any teenagers using Linux.
Interesting what happens when you throw water on an oil fire, huh? =)
I just hope Cliff was able to get some solutions...Sorry I don't have anything to offer there Cliff, I'm a newbie with Linux...just getting ready to put it on a box at school.
Just use QSeeMe as the client, and search for a Linux reflector - there are lots of them.
Of course, this is fully compatible with the original Cornell CU-SeeMe Windows client.
If you can't cope with that, mail me: florin@expert.ro
Someone posted that they couldn't ping www.inria.fr--well, I can ping it just fine, and, more importantly, reach it w/ http. Maybe it was down for a moment or something. Anyway, the url for ivs is www.inria.fr/rodeo/ivs.html. It may or may not be a good solution for you, but I've had a very good experience with another piece of INRIA software (scilab--like matlab but better, imo). Yay for french socialism and free software. Now check it out.
We hate M$
M$ must die!
I am not a teenager. I work in corporate America for a small software company who is bullied by M$.
MS $UX!
Bill Gate$ MUST DIE!.... HORRIBLY!... NOW!!!!
NT $UX! 95,98 $UX!!!!!
YOU... GO TO HELL!
I was really intreseted in doing a H.323 and H.324 compatible video program. Basicly all the ones that are currently out there suck. Either they are a pain to compile and when you do, they are not very impressive. I saw a post in freshmeat a while back that someone was doing a H.324 lib. What really makes me mad is CUSEEME has a reflector for linux but its a POS. I was reading some specs on both those protocols, They where currently out of my league of programing. Check the ITU specs your self.(They do get nasty) (If someone is familiar with alot of ITU data compression specs this should be cake.) Whats even more unfortuate is that Intel makes the common H.32X library for win 32. Perhaps since they are the new linux friend on the block they can do a port and make thousands of people happy. Personaly this flustrated me, I thought i was the only person in the world that even cared about it.
incite@geocities.com
I am pretty sure I saw a java video streamer at www.oracle.com. I wanted to watch Ol' Larry speak at comdex, but was amazed to find a java based video streamer. Makes me think we could do some open source java video streaming
I'd take an gram of plutonium over a ton of TNT
..
I've got vic and the bttv driver working. So far this is really the best (non-commercial, anyway) solution I could find. It seems like there are lots of others in the works (like http://www.openh323.org) but they don't seem to be running yet (even in Beta).
I would suggest starting with a bttv based card (like the 3Com "Big Picture" video conferencing kit) and go from there. The best supported video capture chip is the bt848, and it will probably be well supported under Linux for at least a while.
Good luck!
Philip Edelbrock
phil@netroedge.com
Netscape is virtually out of the picture
I don't see that from where I've been sitting. AOL has been talking and stressing that they will continue to support the OS movement in the browser issue, Mozilla has also been stressing that AOL is going to let them be, so to speak, and the browser is still being actively modified by developers.
They have also started a brand new engine which is completely new/rewritten which is faster then the existing engine in Netscapes browers. They are also completely rewritting the browser to be totally complient with the current HTML standards instead of the standards just being added to it causing bloat like some other browser company does. I would keep an eye out for the next major release of Netscape 5.x or what have you, you should see some vast improvements.
I see 1999 being a very good year in the release and progressions of OS software.
You read too much into what I said, and that addition was actually part of the original question , I just reworded it a bit to fit the style of the article.
I also have to disagree with your assertion that it was unnecessary, when it most definitely was. My intention for mentioning it was this: I wanted to see if people could come up with alternatives!
You see, without alternatives to NetMeeting, then the fears allayed by that comment are extremely justified because it means that Microsoft can and will "embrace and extend" simply because they can. Judging from the comments expressed here so far, there are not many alternatives that have the popular mindshare that would make them a contender for said market (I haven't seen a single solution mentioned more than twice).
Most of the ones that have been mentioned are outdated.
I agree with everything you said above, however you need to stop seeing every mention of Microsoft as a call to Microsoft bash.
In case I haven't made this clear enough here: I do not tolerate Microsoft bashing, or bashing of any sort on Ask Slashdot articles. If I see posts that exist for the sole purpose of bashing, then they get moderated. Period.
So please, read the article more carefully, and remember what I've said here. Being "professional" also means dealing with the difficult questions, and I felt this question qualified: Until I posted this question, the only Video Conferencing software I knew of was NetMeeting.
I hope this clears things up.
Please, not only can Linux teleconference, it can multicast them out.
:)
There is, 'vic' which probably the most popular for multicasts.
I'm sure you can find others (which don't require multicasting) if you look hard enough
The world is neither black nor white nor good nor evil, only many shades of CowboyNeal.
I agree. The poster was asking how to do videoconferencing under Linux, and that little comment changed it into a question asking how to do videoconferencing without using Microsoft.
"How do I do videoconferencing in Linux" is a completely valid question - asking how to do something. "How do I do videoconferencing without using Microsoft" is just Microsoft-bashing - asking how to NOT do something. It's the difference between being constructive and being destructive.
...and people wonder why the Linux community is perceived as being an "anti-microsoft" community, rather than a more constructive pro-UNIX community.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I have compiled vic under debian with the bttv drivers, The results and hints are on my web site, Alan's Linux Info Ctr, The link previously will get a version for windows - that is a precompiled binary. The Linux one needs to be compiled. (This needs an older version of tcl/tk, so there is a modified one on the debian site (instructions on my page).
I have had mixed success with it so far, On a ethernet internal network it works great, however over the internet, It totally failed. Still looking for ideas, - looks like investigating a reflector might be a good idea.
Hong Kong Linux Center home of squidblock, and other cool stuff
According to WinNT Magazine (http://www.winntmag.com/magazine/article.cfm?Arti cleID=3617):
/mill
/mill
"NT 5.0 includes an updated version of NetMeeting, a conference tool similar to ICQ and Powwow that lets you communicate with other users over the Internet. NetMeeting includes features from voice and video conferencing to whiteboard diagramming. These features may sound fairly standard, but NetMeeting lets users handle collaborative work across platforms. You've probably worked with shared applications between Windows machines. Working with someone else's copy of Word or Excel via a remote control program from your NT machine isn't terribly impressive. But what if you could work with a program running on a Linux or Solaris computer? Because NetMeeting is also available for UNIX platforms, users on non-Windows platforms can remotely control Windows applications as if they were running those applications natively. That's impressive thin-client technology."
So maybe..
Addtionally the Dec 1998 issue's "NT News Analysis" by Craig Barth:
"However developing for Linux takes on a whole new meaning as independent software vendors (ISVs) contemplate releasing to the masses what is essentially their core asset - the intellectual property that the original source code they've written represents. According to intellectual property lawyers, the Linux licensing agreement binds any developers who produce software using components of the Linux OS (e.g. libraries, runtimes) to release source code for their additions (i.e. applications) in the public domain. This limitation, more than any other issue, will stop mainstream commercial Linux development dead in its tracks. Evaluating strategies involving Linux-based solutions, IS planners need to consider that commitments made today may vanish tomorrow. As a result, customers who invest in Linus may end up without crucial applications."
This is FUD at its best. Mix some half truths and then lie about what they really mean. Maybe someone with thourough knowledge of GPL and Linux can reply to their Readers section and point out what they got wrong.
They compare NT/VMS/UNIX in this issue too. Linux is discussed too, but I think he is talking about 2.0.x based on his complaints about SMP support.
I think Dec 1998 will be accessible on the WWW in March.
http://www-mice.cs.ucl.ac.uk/shr imp/d2f/index.html
http://www-mice.cs.ucl.ac.uk/mult imedia/software/
A PIM-2 multicast router can be found somewhere off of:
http://netweb.usc.edu/multicast/
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Personally I would take the first option. The only value money has for me is that it provides food, shelter, a decently upgraded computer, and most importantly, a way to gain knowledge. Spending money gets boring after a few weeks. Learning never does... and neither does the warm fuzzy feeling.
I pity the ones who check the greedy bastard box.
ElpDragon.
If Corel could even _SELL_ Netwinders it would be a start.
Our company has contacted Corel several times to buy Netwinders for resale.
So far no luck, just lots of "Real Soon Now" promises..
Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
There is an open source ORB, TAO, available from
http://siesta.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/TAO.html
The significiant feature of this ORB is its real-time characteristics and its Audio-Visual service. This feature has been developed in conjunction with the Washington University School Of Medicine.
There are a number of example applications, generally built around some real problem. I don't know if there is one already for your particular problem, but certainly the tools are all there if you want to take a crack at a solution.
No my friend, the article comment itself seemed pretty relevant, and the fact that MS is positioning itself to dominate, and RAPE another market is something I am interested in. This however, is not new News.
Your comment however is enough to get me to write in. I was a teenage Linux dood and my passion for the OS carried out of my teenage years. Using linux cuts out apps that I might have access to in windows but if you ask me it's WORTH it.
I used linux when windoze could have been an easy way out. I did this because I believe in what it stands for. I believe that open source software will be superior and more stable. Maybe Linux is the closest thing to religion in my life!
Honestly, I think you have as much right to decide the content of slashdot and your comment expressed your opinion. If everyone flames an article, you can bet it won't be posted again. If you're in the minority, you're going to have to live it or leave. You can always skip the article.
Finally, I don't bash MS on principle, but I bash some of their techniques. I have watched them jump ahead in a market only to slap us with proprietary protocals which lock everyone out and Linux users a lot of pain. I have no need for video conferencing but fact that when I DO have a need, MS might be my only choice is very relevant and scary to me.
-- Mako Hill Standing up to an evil system mako(at)debian(dot)org is exhilarating. --RMS
This goes out to anyone who has used or hasn't heard of gPhoto.
gPhoto is a free, GPL'ed Linux/Un*x based application that allows users to download,
view, manipulate, and save pictures from a large selection of supported digital cameras. It is now at version 0.1.2-DR, and has been known to compile run on GNU/Linux, FreeBSD, and NetBSD. BUT, it should run on any system that has the required libraries installed.
More information can be found at http://gphoto.fix.no/
As for the update, the devel version that is currently being worked on has
come quite a long way even from the most recent release (which was posted
2 weeks ago). Currently, the following library projects are being worked
on:
* Kodak DC-2x, DC-50 support
* Kodak DC-2xx support
* Ricoh support
* Fuji support
This will practically double the number of cameras supported by gPhoto.
On top of that, there is now an added HTML Gallery generator. This
"Plug-in" allows users to turn the thumbnail index into a full-fledged
web-gallery from themed templates that will come with gPhoto. Users can
make their own themes from scratch, easily, or use one of the themes
provided.
The Live Camera! plug-in will eventually support time-capture sequences,
and save to animated gifs, or movies; live video.
The company I work for (Sorenson Vision Inc.) is releasing a kick-ass video conferencing system for the MS-Windows platform in April. You can read about it at .
It may be the nicest video conferencing system available when it comes out. Unfortunately, the company has no current plans for ports to any other platform because they don't see the economic feasibility of doing so.
If you've used the Sorenson plugin for QuickTime you know the technology is superior to most video compression codecs available so it would be very cool if they would support the Linux movement in some fashion.
The company I work for (Sorenson Vision Inc.) is releasing a kick-ass video conferencing system for the MS-Windows platform in April. You can read about it at this site.
It may be the nicest video conferencing system available when it comes out. Unfortunately, the company has no current plans for ports to any other platform because they don't see the economic feasibility of doing so.
If you've used the Sorenson plugin for QuickTime you know the technology is superior to most video compression codecs available so it would be very cool if they would support the Linux movement in some fashion.
But what hardware do you need to do video confrencing? A lot of people have frame grabbers like the WinTV card, but which cards allow you to output video?
FiGZ.COM - A waste of perfectly good web space
Marratech offers a great multimedia solution well suited for educational need. It contains players as well as servers for Video (read lectures) on demand. It works well with Windows and Unixes.
'It's kind of fun to do the impossible.'
- Walt Disney
A disgusting problem with the computer industry is sloppy computer scientists. In other fields of science I notice a strive for efficiency and high standards. A major software power like Microsoft should try to attain the highest standards of quality, but they fail to. Windows is bloated, buggy, and (excluding Windows NT) is still a shell for 16 bit dos. Although Windows NT is more stable ,it has more security holes than swiss cheese. Should we run our nation's infrastructure on that?
:(
The funny thing is most people believe Microsoft is the best form of software around. Even some computer scientists I know. If I design a bridge that collapses, but is user friendly I would loose my engineering license. On the other hand, Microsoft, who does similar things, makes billions of dollars. Does this say anything about the computer industry?
I'm sorry to say that our industry is substandard when you compare it with other sciences. We have to wake up or Microsoft will dominate the OS marke... oh damn too late.
you say that bashing ms is wrong, yet you bash on every teen that sees the article. lose the stereotype. if we're to the point of using Linux, we don't fit that one.
An open source H323 project recently got started:
http://www.OpenH323.org/
Not much there yet, but it looks promising.
A project to integrate embedded video conferencing from audio analyzed "programming" ?
I'm writing communication software tools. My company require me to use OpenBSD. The platform is for development pertaining extensions of base code. Some other can prefer Irix when debugging code, going over source server. They also make build on Linux, debugging afterwards. Why these people end up testing toolchain in no time..!
Happy New Year!!
Actually it looks like at least 1996
"vic.html,v 1.4 96/07/22 13:39:33"
Not that it matters a lot.
It seems like you haven't been on Slashdot
enough. First, the footer fits in perfectly
in the context of this question, second there
are things Microsoft is good at (yes, I admit it)
but... this domination of different markets
has gone on long enough. It's like Microsoft
has brainwashed their employees to code in
a proprietary, single-platform, manner. Who
needs them? Third of all, i don't know how old
the people who run Slashdot are, but I can tell
you, they aren't businessmen, they didn't start
this site so that professionals were the only
ones able to post their ideas. this site is
for EVERYONE, and its scope is anything and
everything technological.
Basically, don't be a smart ass
You should use the mbone tools like sdr, vic, vat, rat.
You can get them all in the IP Multicast tools SHRIMP distribution.
I have been using them for about a year, and its way better than NetMeeting, because its multicast. Your network will be happier with multicast traffic, because it is greatly more efficient than point-to-point and you can do a videoconference between a lot of people at the same time, not just two people. With non-multicast tools, if you want to do videoconference with multiple people, you have to get a special server, "reflector", with lot of power.
This is the SHRIMP home page:
http://www-shrimp.cs.ucl.ac.uk/shrimp/
http://www.syscam.com/
Bye. Dsa.I am currently working on a high quality video confrencing kit for Linux using the Video4Linux API
Keep an eye on my website
Say hi to Billy for me when you stop by to get your paycheck. Anyhow, back to the actual subject, and not people being hypocritical about not being on subject (hah!), I too would like to know more about Linux videoconferencing. I specifically bought a WinTV card awhile back because I heard that ATI wasn't being very helpful when it came to releasing their card's specifications. I see a couple of good web links here to check out, but can anyone tell me which programs they personally have gotten to work on a WinTV card? Thanks!