Capture Boards

Joanne Callahan (jc46@cornell.edu)
Tue, 17 Jan 1995 13:53:18 -0500


To: cu-seeme-l@cornell.edu
Subject: Capture boards
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 11:59:13 -0500
From: Richard Kennerly <kennerly@nr-tech.cit.cornell.edu>

John,
We haven't stood up and recommended another capture card because there
really isn't anything as perfect for CU-SeeMe as the Video Spigot. There
is a list of some boards that do work that I and others send around every
so often.
We do have a new external codec that allows the Promovie Spectrum, and
hopefully many others, to work although at a significantly slower capture
rate.
After getting an initial audio version out I need to investigate the
new msvideo driver that doesn't work with CU-SeeMe. I welcome any tech.
info on what the differences are. We also plan to try to get an Intel
card if we can get a reasonable card and figure out which model to get.

-Rich Kennerly - <rbk1@cornell.edu> PC Windows CU-SeeMe developer

------- Forwarded Message

Received: from listproc.mail.cornell.edu (LISTPROC.MAIL.CORNELL.EDU
[132.236.56.14]) by mitchell.cit.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id
RAA21305; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 17:13:56 -0500
Received: from localhost.mail.cornell.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by
listproc.mail.cornell.edu with SMTP id <279223-1>; Mon, 16 Jan 1995
17:07:13 -0500
Received: from cornell.edu ([132.236.56.6]) by listproc.mail.cornell.edu
with SMTP id <277554-7>; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 16:37:53 -0500
Received: from cornell.edu (PHQUERY) by cornell.edu with cornell-phquery id
<372846-3>; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 16:37:34 -0500
Received: from inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com ([16.1.0.23]) by cornell.edu with SMTP
id <372803-3>; Mon, 16 Jan 1995 16:36:40 -0500
Received: from us4rmc.pko.dec.com by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com (5.65/10Aug94)
id AA14208; Mon, 16 Jan 95 13:31:35 -0800
Received: from csse.enet by us4rmc.pko.dec.com (5.65/rmc-22feb94)
id AA10686; Mon, 16 Jan 95 16:34:28 -0500
Received: from csse.enet; by us4rmc.enet; Mon, 16 Jan 95 16:34:28 EST
Message-Id: <9501162134.AA10686@us4rmc.pko.dec.com>
Reply-To: faherty@csse.enet.dec.com
Sender: owner-CU-SEEME-L@cornell.edu
From: <faherty@csse.enet.dec.com>
To: <CU-SEEME-L@cornell.edu>
Subject: RE: Collins' complaint
X-To: cu-seeme-l@cornell.edu
X-Cc: faherty@csse.enet.dec.com
X-PH: V4.1@cornell.edu (Cornell Modified)
X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.1 -- ListProcessor by CREN
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 17:05:43 -0500

While Mr. Collins mail may not have been worded diplomatically, I'd bet it is
very true that new PC users (certainly myself) are frustrated at this point
in not being able to become full-fledged CU-SeeMe users (i.e. receivers and
senders) because of the fact that the two recommended, tested boards for
PC/Windows - Creative Labs Video Spigot and FS200 - have been discontinued.

That frustration is compounded by the fact that there hasn't been a lot of
info, at least on this list, about workable, reasonably priced, and currently
available alternatives, nor on what boards will be tested/supported in future
PC/Windows releases of CU-SeeMe (should I be following a different list for
this info, though ?).

That's no reflection on the CU-SeeMe development team, though, who I feel are
doing excellent, breakthrough, and benevolent work. I know of no other effort
in this space that is doing more to bring desktop videoconferencing to the
masses than CU-SeeMe.

So, to turn Mr. Collins wording around, somebody please DO tease me with
information about capture hardware to be supported/tested for the next release
of PC/Windows CU-SeeMe, and about the capture hardware options besides
the Spigot and FS200 boards that are generally known to work (well) with
CU-SeeMe on the PC/Windows platform. Is there a definitive list somewhere ?

I'd rather be teased than frustrated :-)

John Faherty

------- End of Forwarded Message