Tim Panton wrote: > On 21 Apr 2007, at 13:06, Philipp Kempgen wrote: > >> Tim Panton wrote: >> >>> On 21 Apr 2007, at 03:21, Philipp Kempgen wrote: >>> >>>> Tzafrir Cohen wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 11:48:20AM -0400, James FitzGibbon wrote: >>>>>> Has anyone found a softphone that supports pulling it's >>>>>> configuration from a >>>>>> central server via TFTP/FTP/HTTP, much like hard desk phones use? >>>>> Why would you want to do that? >>>> Because you could provision softphones the way you provision hard >>>> phones. Dynamic configuration through HTTP or even SIP messages. >>>> That would really be great. >>>> >>>> I think it's a valid question and I've been searching for such >>>> softphones as myself. They should be usable (so most of them fail) >>>> and should work on a real OS (tm). And no Java please :) >>> What's your objection to a softphone in java ? >> Java is slow and the interface is always ugly and doesn't fit >> into the window manager etc. you are used to. :-P I never understood >> why I would use Java to write software when I could use C(++) or >> when a script language would do. > > I tend to agree with you there. If there is a scripting language to > do what > you need- use it. But there is no scripting language I know with > realtime > audio and access to UDP sockets.
Right. That's not one of the things you typically do in an interpreted language. :) > However Corraleta avoids these points by doing all the UI stuff in > HTML, so users can customize it any way they like > (see www.phonefromhere.com). > > It lives in a browser, so the window > manager thing doesn't apply (though to be honest what the > other softphones do to the UI rules is pretty scary - see Xten). Yeah. > Best yet, the behavior is customizable in javascript - A thing I haven't > seen in other softphones - yet. Cool. I'll probably give it a try as soon as I find some time. >> The simple fact that people have >> 2 or 3 GHz doesn't mean that I have to burn them for nothing. >> The only point may be portability. Do I miss something? > > As to speed, you missed out on about 10 years of progress. A modern JVM > is really no slower than the equivalent C++. One of the text-to-speech > engines was ported to Java and ran faster due to the fact that the > memory > management was smarter than in the C version. Startup is still a > problem, > but people live with the startup time of KDE, so what can I say.... :) Regards, Philipp -- amooma GmbH - Bachstr. 126 - 56566 Neuwied - http://www.amooma.de Let's use IT to solve problems and not to create new ones. Asterisk? -> http://www.das-asterisk-buch.de Geschäftsführer: Stefan Wintermeyer Handelsregister: Neuwied B 14998 _______________________________________________ --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