RE: Which PC framegrabber is recommended?

Alfred Coward (alfredc@Onramp.NET)
Wed, 25 Oct 1995 13:32:39 -0500

I had the same type of problems with the original VB. After about $150 =
worth of long distance calls to Creative they told me that the VB put =
out a lot of interference and that it was my pc's problem to protect the =
video card from the interference put out by the VB.

From: Brandon S. Dewberry[]
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 1995 3:43 AM
Subject: Which PC framegrabber is recommended?

We're working on a set of applications which support distributed project =
teams. CU-SeeMe is one of the apps. We've got Macs and Sun clients =
working great, and now we (I) need help integrating PCs.

I read the compat.txt file and ordered a Creative Labs Video Blaster =
SE100. After installing it and the VFW drivers all I get is a nice =
still of snow in the local window. There is nothing in the VB docs =
about setting up the board for use by other applications. I can't find =
any way of configuring CU-SeeMe specifically for this board. Hints =

But my main reason for this note is to ask which PC board that folks =
prefer. Which one works the best with CU-SeeMe, doesn't interfere with =
other apps on the system (Netscape and an X server), provides room for =
growth into a better CU-SeeMe, and doesn't require any other special =
hardware. Other niceties are working well with Win95, has both audio =
and video(anyone making these?) and comes with an inexpensive but =
quality camera.

We picked the SE100 because it was on the compatibility list and easy to =
locate. But we're not married to it.

Any other suggestions?

(205) 544-4247

Alfred H. Coward