On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 07:55 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > For all the noise about this noone has mentioned one important thing. > We should be gratefull that we have access to G.729a in Asterisk, > whatever the mechanics of the licensing. It's obvious that its a pain > in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] for Digium who absolutely not making ANY on it money > for > their efforts. It would be really easy for them to say "no more" and > it wouldn't really impact their business at all, except to reduce > their headaches. > but they do in 2004 mark said it was one of their biggest revenue streams. Or do you mean that they dont make any money selling asterisk under their business edition line? Or maybe they dont make any money selling the hardware to people who buy it to 'support' asterisk development. I believe that cnet said they made over $10M/year in an article about an interview with mark.
If $10M/year is not ANY money I would like to not make any money too. > This will be especially true when they introduce their new hardware > based transcoding engine. Why then should they gee just like sangoma (only sangoma anounced it first :) wonder if it will still use the zap interface and choke the system with more interrupts than required. I also wonder when asterisk will have better sangoma support so you can cut your interrupts from say 1000/sec to 50/sec. But that probably wont happen in tree. > Again, we should be gratefull! It could very easily go away > altogether. > the codec? there will be alternatives for a licensed g729a and B (for those that want to do VAD when that is implemented) codec for asterisk. > Those of you constantly complaining...this is supposed to be a open > source community...don't just demand a better licensing > scheme...design and implement one. That can be your contibution to the > project. I'm not a code jockey or I'd have a go myself. > its being done. Infact I am on the phone with some people talking about that right now. And have been for a little while (on/off for a couple months). Now you say that you arent a code monkey so you are unable to write one, but you can suggest what others should do. Specifically code something new. Hmm sounds like you just did the very thing you are complaining about. So I am lost are you complaining about your post now or what? All I have to say is that at least you can (aparently I still havent tested it with asterisk) port your digium licenses for which you paid when digium is closed but your business isnt :) and to show that I am not just suggesting a different licensing model but actually contributing here is the link to the BSD licensed code (whee its not gpl) for a trivial program and thus is my contribution. Note I have no disclaimer on file as the gpl is against my religion and as such am barred from contributing to asterisk directly. http://www.0xdecafbad.com/Remapping-function-calls.html > -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel Belfast IE +44 28 9099 6461 DE +49 801 777 555 3402 Utrecht NL +31 306 553058 US WA +1 360 207 0479 US NY +1 516 687 5200 FreeWorldDialup: 635378 http://www.trxtel.com we pay you to terminate calls with us!
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
