Re: Audio: ECU vs. Iphone

Jonathan Day (Jonathan.Day@umist.ac.uk)
Mon, 15 Apr 1996 00:21:06 +0000


Dennis J. Streveler wrote:
<text removed>
> The Iphone is performing quite admirably. It would appear that major
> difference in design is that CU "throws away audio" if it cannot process it,
> while Iphone "delays audio" in the same case. Therefore there are times when
> you will get an audio feed TWICE in Iphone because the first instance of
> transmission got chopped or interrupted. It'd rather (on occasion) get TWO
> feeds than none at all, which is the all too frequent case with CU. My
> experience so far is that the audio 'codecs' apparently used by Iphone and
> those used by ECU just aren't in the same league at all.
>
> In fact, I hear there are some people who use Iphone IN CONJUNCTION WITH CU.
> Now this makes some sense, I suppose. And on ISDN there should be ample
> bandwidth for both (at least on a one-to-one connection).

I'd quite like to see a comparison chart, some time, between the
various packages floating round.

For example, how does IPhone compare to vat, nevot or ivs, in terms of
sound quality, number of connections, protocols supported, packet loss
due to software, etc?

Commercial packages are often (but not always) good, but there are
rare occasions when a free package is actually better.