(#395) Re: Proposed Aim for Speak Freely

Message posted to the Speak Freely Forum
  by Jeff MacKinnon on Mon, 18 Aug 2003 03:36:53 +0200 (MEST).
  http://www.fourmilab.ch/wb/speak-freely.pl?rev=395

  Reply To: (#391) Re: [speak-freely] Proposed Aim for Speak Freely
  Author:   "P Heyden"
  Date:     2003-08-16 16:12

I wholeheartedly agree with Paul vander Heyden. One of Speak Freely's several
advantages is its simplicity and stability. I think most of us just want an
Internet alternative to "plain old telephone service." The fact that Speak
Freely sounds as good (or better in most cases) than commercial telephone is
"icing on the cake!" Heck, I was thrilled to death just to see the "increasing
delay" problem fixed, and the "Systray" feature really made my day!

It's tempting at this point in Speak Freely's life to attempt to turn it into
a "killer application" that can do everything, but like the Universal Field
Theory, is probably a long way off if not impossible. As a regular Speak
Freely user, my main concern is that the most basic services be maintained
[such as the directory and echo servers, and code (source and object)
availabilty]. Since the E.O.L. announcement, there have been numerous posts
with as many ideas - but not one offer to provide what Speak Freely needs the
most to survive the initial stages of its afterlife - a directory server. (I
would be interested in doing this if I had the proper bandwidth and some UNIX
knowledge.)

If we can't support the basics, how can we expect to create a next generation,
killer ap. version of Speak Freely?

One step at a time please...

Thanks.

Jeff MacKinnon
KB1RC

: Forwarded from the [email protected]
: mailing list: Gentlemen,

: I have followed this thread of what ought and
: what ought not be done with SF
: and I only ask that the collective
: "we" not forget what many of us
: use SF
: for. Namely, "plain old internet
: telephone".

: It is nice to talk about high quality codecs
: etc, but I can tel you that for
: normal telecommunications 64K is not needed.
: For many years I ran very good
: quality PCM multiplexed voice circuits at 16K.
: Our customers could not tell
: the difference between 16k and 64K.

: What is needed is a definitive plan for the
: future of SF. As in many things
: you have to walk before you run. I see the
: maintenance and support of the
: current product as a basic cornerstone for what
: the future might hold.

: Sincerely,

: Paul vander Heyden
: ----- Original Message -----
: From: "Bob Arctor"
: [email protected] >
: To: [email protected] >
: Cc: [email protected] >
: Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 5:52 AM
: Subject: Re: [speak-freely] Proposed Aim for
: Speak Freely

: > yes , optionally.
: > big drawback of SF is that you can't
: change quality/codec 'on the fly'
: >
: > i.e. over LAN where 10Mbit is a norm, and
: 10% is usually used bandwitch
: isn't problem...
: >
: >
: > since few months i am thinging about
: integration of Xvnc with speak
: freely. but this would require high quality
: codeds in SF.
: >
: > Xvnc is remote desktop app, it would be
: great if it could transmit sound
: also.
: >
: > i know there is NAS and ARTS/ESD but those
: servers do not support
: compression+encryption.
: >
: >
: > On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 10:11:16 +0200
: > "Leonardo Boselli"
: [email protected] > wrote: >
: > > If you want to trasmt music at a
: better quality it mis more likely that
: you
: > > want integrity than real-time . so a
: tcp trasmission would be bettere,
: and
: > > anyway this is not an internet phone
: application.
: > > You can _optionally_ put other
: codecs, but for real time telephomy
: > > saving lag and bandwidth it is a
: must.
: > > Even if you had a wide bandwidth
: connection, usng a low bandwidth
: > > channel would always yeld bettere
: real time results than larger
: > > bandwidth ones (consider if in the
: same wideband connection there are
: > > other users ....)
: > >
: > >
: > >
: > > Il 15 Aug 2003 alle 0:59, Bob Arctor
: immise in rete: > >
: > > > i disagree.
: > > > when you talk over thing like
: inernet phone,
: > > > your demands expand, perhaps you
: would like to send background
: > > > noises, or you would like to
: have audio quality enough clean to be
: > > > able to reproduce your voice
: when you move around the room ,
: > > > or even wanted to transmit some
: music .
: > > > there is ogg/vorbis compression,
: and mp3 compression, both which are
: lossy. they introduce bit larger lag than usual
: GSM compression, but still
: quite acceptable.
: > > > they're meant for
: high-compression ratios, and sound compresed
: using
: them sounds much better than using all other
: algorihms.
: > > > you should check out mp3rtp.
: > > > limiting bandwitch is good only
: in places where very small lag is
: needed.
: > > --
: > > Leonardo Boselli
: > > Nucleo Informatico e Telematico del
: Dipartimento Ingegneria Civile
: > > Universita` di Firenze , V. S. Marta
: 3 - I-50139 Firenze
: > > tel +39 0554796431 cell +39
: 3488605348 fax +39 055495333
: > > http://www.dicea.unifi.it/~leo
: > >
: > >

                      * * *

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send E-mail containing
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body (*not* as the
Subject) to [email protected]