Re: [tlug] Not Skype

[Edward Middleton <edwardmiddleton@example.com>]

On Sat, 2005-12-24 at 11:14 +0900, Josh Glover wrote:
> On 24/12/05, Edward Middleton <edwardmiddleton@example.com> wrote:
> > You can do VoIP fine with open sources software it just requires a bit
> > more effort to set everything up.
> Yes, I have successfully* videoconferenced with my brother-in-law
> using GnomeMeeting on my end (he was using NetMeeting, of course).
NetMeeting never worked well with GnomeMeeting, NetMeeting supports H263
video CODEC but GnomeMeeting crowd are not keen on supporting it because
of patent concerns.

> * where "successfully" is defined as: he could hear us, and we could
> both see and hear him; he could not see us, despite our video feed
> being sent out correctly.
Well I can understand your reservations if that is your idea of success.
I have only used GnomeMeeting to connect to other GnomeMeeting users for
which it worked very well (configuring the firewall/NAT is a common
problem though), both video and audio.

> The allure of Skype is that it *does not* take extra effort to set up.
> Or any effort, for that matter. And that is cool with me--I just want
> to talk to my family on the other side of the world for cheap.
I want to video conference with family and friends anywhere in the world
for the cost of the Internet connection, on a secure line inaccessible
to untrustworthy intermediaries[1], so I guess our aims and how much
effort we are prepared to put in is different.

> When I have time to really get geeky with VoIP, sure, I will dive into
> Asterisk. Of course, I will still have to figure out a way to get
> "out" to a normal phone line to call my Grandmother, who has no
> computer...
This is one of the primary functions of Asterisk. If you use a TSP and
asterisk you can call to standard phone lines (this is basically all I
use it for).  The difference is that you can chose from a range of TSP's
not just one.  There are even modules that will dynamically determine
the cheapest provider to for at given time for a given route, but this
is not something I have looked at.

> This is also why I use the BSD licence for all of my projects: I want
> to provide the source with no strings attached. If it is useful, use
> it how you see fit. Even if how you see fit is in a closed source,
> proprietary project.
I premise this with the assumption that if there was a choice, all
things being equal, that you would rather them release the code.  The
problem is that this inevitably reverts to a decision of, we can do
something (release the code) and face risk X, Y, Z and some intangible
benefit, or do nothing for no risk.

[1] http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/23/skype/
-- 
Edward Middleton <edwardmiddleton@example.com>