On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 at 17:42 +0100, Christoph Eckert wrote: > > Personally, I'd rather > > just avoid them altogether, as it seems what they've > > brought to the mix is primarily marketing. > > Their protocol has the advantage that it works very well even > on low bandwith connections. I may be off-base here, but as I understand it the bulk of the transmission of any VOIP transmission is the audio data itself. In that case, what matters is the codec. I don't remember the name of it, but I do know that asterisk supports the same codec that skype uses. So asterisk doesn't (yet?) support the skype protocol, but it should be able to sound just as good over the same bandwidth (perhaps even better, since IAX is a good and lean protocol). > And what they did very well was to make their software easy to > use on every platform. Simply visit the homepage, download it > and a wizard will help you configuring it. This is definitely important and not to be overlooked. > While the others still discussed SIP they did the market - > they simply did it clever enough. Also a good thing to do. Asterisk did something similar with IAX. -- .O. Hans Fugal | De gustibus non disputandum est. ..O http://hans.fugal.net | Debian, vim, mutt, ruby, text, gpg OOO | WindowMaker, gaim, UTF-8, RISC, JS Bach --------------------------------------------------------------------- GnuPG Fingerprint: 6940 87C5 6610 567F 1E95 CB5E FC98 E8CD E0AA D460 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://music.columbia.edu/pipermail/linux-audio-user/attachments/20050320/dcb3df79/attachment.bin
