Re: CU-SeeMe compression goal could be....

Ko Stoel (
Fri, 16 Dec 1994 13:55:10 -0500

(...using 28k8 modem and doing video & voice...)

Tim wrote:
>.... Sure, I would pay $1000 for it if everyone else owned
>it; I wouldn't pay a penny if I was to be the only one..
>.... As more and more people
>start paying for bandwidth from their pockets, however, adding better
>compression will make more and more sense.

I seem to gear more towards analog-phoning a friend ; "Hey! let's
videophone..." "Sorry we cannot speak also..." "Do you have ISDN..." "You
know ISDN in Germany is cheaper than analog..." "Yeh well they ..."


1.Consider the word 'optional' and connections can negotiate on how much
compression will be used, what CPU power both parties have and want to

2. compression scheme's can lay the burden at the sending or the receiving
side (at least that's what I read about MPEG; lot's of power to compress,
little power needed to decompress) BTW Isn't MPEG4 (in development) just
for the purpose of videophoning (without the MPEG2 latency).

3. In case of Reflectors they can negotiate with the end-user and do some
intermediate (de)compression (Hmm.. the Gray.)

4. Maybe I would be very pleased if I could speak intermittantly via maven
over 28k8 bandwidth . What priority does CU-SeeMe give voice(maven) over
video . I will :) send "subscribe maven My Name" to "" to
get info on speach-compression.


Ko Stoel

for info on CU-SeeMe