on Mon, 01 Oct 2001, Keith Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>At 06:25 01/10/01 -0400, Michael Gurstein wrote:
>>Video-conferencing has been around for a very long time (by tech standards)
>>at least since the mid-1960's with a resurgence of interest that coincides
>>with upticks in energy/travel costs and seems to go in 10 year cycles.
>>
>>This last one though, might be real. Pres. Bush has been shown on tv
>>several times conspicuously video-conferencing from Camp David. Four of my
>>students--out of 16 or so, (most of whom work full-time) in a higher level
>>MIS class regularly use video-conferencing, and by the way, find it tedious
>>in the extreme!
>This is interesting! What is the set-up. Is this is where someone is
>speaking 1:1, or 1:group, or 1 of any in group:1 of any in group? (This
>shows my ignorance of videoconferencing.) If you have time I'd like to know
>exactly what is tedious about it -- if it's possible to describe. Are there
>too many time lapses? Is it lack of decent camera angles? Is it the
>artificiality of the situation?
>
>I'd be fascinated to know, if you can put your finger on it.
I didn't see an answer go by for this, so I'll toss out what I know
about such things: there is an interactive video protocol for the
net, which goes by the name "M-bone". I have no idea what the
acronym is, and I've never used it myself, but we have the system
set up here, and I've talked to people who have used it. It is simply
a matter of attaching a camera, microphone and speakers to your computer,
installing the software, and routing IP packets via an M-bone backbone
which attempts to keep the bitrate up to real time. The display shows has
the video images from each station in the conference tiled across the
screen, so depending how each station uses its camera, you may be
faced with a checkerboard of the faces of the other participants.
The impression users have of the system is that the experience is
a bit odd, particularly to start. You have to remain fairly stationary
to keep your face in the picture (I believe you see your own image on
the screen along with the others), and it's difficult to separate
out who is speaking when the voices come from the (loud)speakers,
not the face on the screen. This makes a long conference rather
more exhausting than a live meeting, where the same level of
concentration is not required. I don't know anyone who has used the
system often enough to become comfortable with it. Those I've
talked to have only done it once or twice, so probably familiarity
will increase the comfort level.
-Pete Vincent
