In defense of CU-SeeMe, was: Re: At&T video

david a. schlussel (
Tue, 27 Jun 1995 13:21:12 -0400 (EDT)

i guess i left off the "for non-UNIX (most) people"
tag when defending the good name of the CU-SeeMe

I just found out that you can do multiparty conferencing
with the vistium system, provided you have a video bridge
that costs, i forget, how many thousands of dollars?
I heard $60K but that seems outrageous.

by the way, haven't you found the video via mbone
just a tad bit slower than CU-SeeMe?

The mbone is pretty great as well, but the unix requirement
(has anyone found a way around it) and the necessity to
install the multicasting kernal upgrades, etc., make it
far less accessible than CU-SeeMe.

My point is, the CU-SeeMe developers goal was to create
a widely accessible, inexpensive (hardware and software),
video conferencing system. I think we can all agree,
otherwise i don't know why we're on this list, that
they've done a pretty wonderful job.

Thank you and good night.

+ David Schlussel +
+ +
+ MCIT-Special Projects +
+ +

On Tue, 27 Jun 1995, Rodney M. Dyer wrote:

> >NOTHING out there "puts CU-SeeMe to shame". None of the
> >other packages, and I've seen many, can do FREE
> >MULTIPARTY CONFERENCING. In point to point connections
> >the others excell. But CU-SeeMe kicks all their butts
> >when it comes to bringing several people together.
> Uh...Ever heard of MBONE???
> Rodney
> Rodney M. Dyer
> PC Network Administrator
> College of Engineering
> University of North Carolina at Charlotte
> Email:
> Phone: (704)547-3154