Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 08:43:01PM -0500, Brian wrote: > On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 23:02:45 +0200 > Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 02:12:41PM -0500, Ruddy Gbaguidi wrote: > > > I never tought this is become a Linux vs Windows fight. > > > We have been using asterisk on linux from a long time now and happy > > > with it. > > > But some of our customers who has windows in their environment want > > > to use our call center software we developed on top of asterisk. > > > So, the question was : > > > Did anybody ever tried to isolate the asterisk SIP server/module and > > > make it run under Windows ? > > > Since, asterisk 12 is using pjsip (which is cross platform already), > > > I tought it may be possible and wanted advices. > > > > > > I would love that every single customer switch to Linux and Ubuntu > > > tomorrow morning but at the moment, that's not the case. > > > > There was an old half-working port of Asterisk to Cygwin which does > > run on Windows. It has not worked since at least 1.6.0 . > > That's just a unix-like interface which won't address the issues the OP > has/had with running/configuring asterisk. IMHO it would probably be > even more challenging. And IIRC the OP was looking for a non emulated > solution anyway. It's not emulated. It uses a compatibility layer library. If emulation were such a major issue for you, I guess you'd never consider using a language such as Java, Perl or Python, where the program runs in its own virtual machine. > > > And for others: the name is [MS-]Windows. Not 'wind-blows" or whatever > > name you find for it. Please respect this list. If you don't have > > anything useful to add to the thread, please refrain from replying. > > > > I have to agree with the name calling part but the OP did imply that > Windows was superior and that a Windows port would be profitable. You > can't really expect to get away with that on a list devoted to an open > source application without making a complete fool out of yourself. > > If it was a post regarding one of the many proprietary closed source > applications/games without a native port to Linux/BSD/OS X then it > would be a valid complaint. Having access to the source as well as > liberal licensing terms which allow porting isn't a valid complaint and > never will be. I did not reply to that troll. I replied an OP who said that MS-Windows was a requirement for his case. -- Tzafrir Cohen icq#16849755 jabber:tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com +972-50-7952406 mailto:tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com http://www.xorcom.com -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:19 AM, CDR wrote: > Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid > version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, > something simple to install, they could go public on the product. > Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that > would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux > expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from > regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET > framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of > friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don´t mean another > slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I > would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. Windows and Linux should be able to coexist. I have had great success setting up a VMware ESXi server with Windows VMs for AD and Exchange and Linux VMs for Asterisk and Web / FTP. Asterisk with Exchange UM for voicemail is a winning combination and works seamlessly. It is essentially a private cloud of the customer. Why not use the OS that works for the task at hand? Ryan -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 23:02:45 +0200 Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 02:12:41PM -0500, Ruddy Gbaguidi wrote: > > I never tought this is become a Linux vs Windows fight. > > We have been using asterisk on linux from a long time now and happy > > with it. > > But some of our customers who has windows in their environment want > > to use our call center software we developed on top of asterisk. > > So, the question was : > > Did anybody ever tried to isolate the asterisk SIP server/module and > > make it run under Windows ? > > Since, asterisk 12 is using pjsip (which is cross platform already), > > I tought it may be possible and wanted advices. > > > > I would love that every single customer switch to Linux and Ubuntu > > tomorrow morning but at the moment, that's not the case. > > There was an old half-working port of Asterisk to Cygwin which does > run on Windows. It has not worked since at least 1.6.0 . That's just a unix-like interface which won't address the issues the OP has/had with running/configuring asterisk. IMHO it would probably be even more challenging. And IIRC the OP was looking for a non emulated solution anyway. > Feel free to try to fix it. I suspect it won't be easy. Patches would > be welcomed, I guess (look at what odd fixes that were accepted to > make Asterisk build and work on OS/X). > That advice was already given by multiple posters. OS X is unix-like as well so I fail to see what help that could be in an endeavour to port asterisk. > And for others: the name is [MS-]Windows. Not 'wind-blows" or whatever > name you find for it. Please respect this list. If you don't have > anything useful to add to the thread, please refrain from replying. > I have to agree with the name calling part but the OP did imply that Windows was superior and that a Windows port would be profitable. You can't really expect to get away with that on a list devoted to an open source application without making a complete fool out of yourself. If it was a post regarding one of the many proprietary closed source applications/games without a native port to Linux/BSD/OS X then it would be a valid complaint. Having access to the source as well as liberal licensing terms which allow porting isn't a valid complaint and never will be. B -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 02:12:41PM -0500, Ruddy Gbaguidi wrote: > I never tought this is become a Linux vs Windows fight. > We have been using asterisk on linux from a long time now and happy > with it. > But some of our customers who has windows in their environment want > to use our call center software we developed on top of asterisk. > So, the question was : > Did anybody ever tried to isolate the asterisk SIP server/module and > make it run under Windows ? > Since, asterisk 12 is using pjsip (which is cross platform already), > I tought it may be possible and wanted advices. > > I would love that every single customer switch to Linux and Ubuntu > tomorrow morning but at the moment, that's not the case. There was an old half-working port of Asterisk to Cygwin which does run on Windows. It has not worked since at least 1.6.0 . Feel free to try to fix it. I suspect it won't be easy. Patches would be welcomed, I guess (look at what odd fixes that were accepted to make Asterisk build and work on OS/X). And for others: the name is [MS-]Windows. Not 'wind-blows" or whatever name you find for it. Please respect this list. If you don't have anything useful to add to the thread, please refrain from replying. -- Tzafrir Cohen icq#16849755 jabber:tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com +972-50-7952406 mailto:tzafrir.co...@xorcom.com http://www.xorcom.com -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
Use FreeSWITCH !! Thats what you want on your winblows system, so suit yourself my friend. Mitul On Dec 5, 2013 12:43 AM, "Ruddy Gbaguidi" wrote: > I never tought this is become a Linux vs Windows fight. > We have been using asterisk on linux from a long time now and happy with > it. > But some of our customers who has windows in their environment want to use > our call center software we developed on top of asterisk. > So, the question was : > Did anybody ever tried to isolate the asterisk SIP server/module and make > it run under Windows ? > Since, asterisk 12 is using pjsip (which is cross platform already), I > tought it may be possible and wanted advices. > > I would love that every single customer switch to Linux and Ubuntu > tomorrow morning but at the moment, that's not the case. > > Thanks. > > Le 2013-12-04 11:31, Patrick Lists a écrit : > >> Probably feeding the trolls but here it goes. >> >> On 12/04/2013 04:19 PM, CDR wrote: >> Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid >> version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, >> something simple to install, they could go public on the product. >> >> IIRC Microsoft no longer invests in the .Net framework which makes it a >> bad idea for a product that would live for up to 10 years. Do you really >> want to bet your business/company that .Net will be there in 5 to 10 >> years? >> >> Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that >> would do exactly the same would be a home run. >> >> I find Linux easier than Windows. Installing a package on Linux or >> Windows is not the issue. How is a simple 'yum install asterisk' any >> more difficult than double clicking on it in Windows? It's what you do >> afterwards with the OS and package. Asterisk has a much steeper learning >> curve than either. It's easy to mess up the config and suffer the >> consequences if the box is Internet facing. Also, Windows has a terrible >> reputation when it comes to security. Why would anyone want to use >> Windows for an Internet facing service? There's a reason that Google, >> Facebook, Twitter and pretty much the rest of the world are powered by >> Linux and it's not only because it's cheaper. >> >> Just because you find Windows easier does not make it a good idea. >> >> Note: I am a Linux >> expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from >> regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. >> >> There is probably a saying about people calling themselves experts and >> then complain about a move from EL6 to F20 which is puzzling by itself. >> >> The .NET >> framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of >> friendliness and on equal footing on performance. >> >> I have yet to see a large Telco or ITSP deploy their services on >> Windows. A while back I have seen some attempts. It was hilarious to >> hear that the servers had to be restarted every few hours. Performance >> totally sucked, components would crash and the solution was, even by >> telco standards, ridiculously expensive. So no, they are not on equal >> footing when it comes to performance (and other aspects). >> >> I don´t mean another >> slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I >> would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. >> >> If you really want to use Windows then have a look at FreeSWITCH as it's >> available on Windows too. Then there is also Lync and 3CX. Good luck >> keeping your Windows boxes from getting hacked with all the financial >> and other damage it would cause. >> >> Regards, >> Patrick >> > > -- > _ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: > http://www.asterisk.org/hello > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
I never tought this is become a Linux vs Windows fight. We have been using asterisk on linux from a long time now and happy with it. But some of our customers who has windows in their environment want to use our call center software we developed on top of asterisk. So, the question was : Did anybody ever tried to isolate the asterisk SIP server/module and make it run under Windows ? Since, asterisk 12 is using pjsip (which is cross platform already), I tought it may be possible and wanted advices. I would love that every single customer switch to Linux and Ubuntu tomorrow morning but at the moment, that's not the case. Thanks. Le 2013-12-04 11:31, Patrick Lists a écrit : Probably feeding the trolls but here it goes. On 12/04/2013 04:19 PM, CDR wrote: Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something simple to install, they could go public on the product. IIRC Microsoft no longer invests in the .Net framework which makes it a bad idea for a product that would live for up to 10 years. Do you really want to bet your business/company that .Net will be there in 5 to 10 years? Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do exactly the same would be a home run. I find Linux easier than Windows. Installing a package on Linux or Windows is not the issue. How is a simple 'yum install asterisk' any more difficult than double clicking on it in Windows? It's what you do afterwards with the OS and package. Asterisk has a much steeper learning curve than either. It's easy to mess up the config and suffer the consequences if the box is Internet facing. Also, Windows has a terrible reputation when it comes to security. Why would anyone want to use Windows for an Internet facing service? There's a reason that Google, Facebook, Twitter and pretty much the rest of the world are powered by Linux and it's not only because it's cheaper. Just because you find Windows easier does not make it a good idea. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. There is probably a saying about people calling themselves experts and then complain about a move from EL6 to F20 which is puzzling by itself. The .NET framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I have yet to see a large Telco or ITSP deploy their services on Windows. A while back I have seen some attempts. It was hilarious to hear that the servers had to be restarted every few hours. Performance totally sucked, components would crash and the solution was, even by telco standards, ridiculously expensive. So no, they are not on equal footing when it comes to performance (and other aspects). I don´t mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. If you really want to use Windows then have a look at FreeSWITCH as it's available on Windows too. Then there is also Lync and 3CX. Good luck keeping your Windows boxes from getting hacked with all the financial and other damage it would cause. Regards, Patrick -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
Probably feeding the trolls but here it goes. On 12/04/2013 04:19 PM, CDR wrote: > Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid > version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, > something simple to install, they could go public on the product. IIRC Microsoft no longer invests in the .Net framework which makes it a bad idea for a product that would live for up to 10 years. Do you really want to bet your business/company that .Net will be there in 5 to 10 years? > Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that > would do exactly the same would be a home run. I find Linux easier than Windows. Installing a package on Linux or Windows is not the issue. How is a simple 'yum install asterisk' any more difficult than double clicking on it in Windows? It's what you do afterwards with the OS and package. Asterisk has a much steeper learning curve than either. It's easy to mess up the config and suffer the consequences if the box is Internet facing. Also, Windows has a terrible reputation when it comes to security. Why would anyone want to use Windows for an Internet facing service? There's a reason that Google, Facebook, Twitter and pretty much the rest of the world are powered by Linux and it's not only because it's cheaper. Just because you find Windows easier does not make it a good idea. > Note: I am a Linux > expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from > regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. There is probably a saying about people calling themselves experts and then complain about a move from EL6 to F20 which is puzzling by itself. > The .NET > framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of > friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I have yet to see a large Telco or ITSP deploy their services on Windows. A while back I have seen some attempts. It was hilarious to hear that the servers had to be restarted every few hours. Performance totally sucked, components would crash and the solution was, even by telco standards, ridiculously expensive. So no, they are not on equal footing when it comes to performance (and other aspects). > I don´t mean another > slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I > would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. If you really want to use Windows then have a look at FreeSWITCH as it's available on Windows too. Then there is also Lync and 3CX. Good luck keeping your Windows boxes from getting hacked with all the financial and other damage it would cause. Regards, Patrick -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
I know who is lost here :) for sure not digium ... -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
On 12/04/2013 11:00 AM, Paul Belanger wrote: > On 13-12-04 10:19 AM, CDR wrote: >> Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid >> version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, >> something simple to install, they could go public on the product. >> Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that >> would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux >> expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from >> regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET >> framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of >> friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don´t mean another >> slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I >> would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. >> > Do you just sit around and think shit up to blame Digium all day? > Normally I do not respond to trolls but... If you want an Asterisk version to run on Windows, go for it. You are free to create it yourself. Most of the folks on this list realize the Asterisk on Windows is a huge mistake. If you really believe that this is such a good idea, go for it and become a bazillionare from your work. Then you can come back and say "I told you so". Until then take the advise of the many good folks on this list that collectively have many decades of experience and run asterisk on Linux. Regards, JohnM -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
On Wednesday 04 December 2013, CDR wrote: > Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid > version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, > something simple to install, they could go public on the product. Why would they? They already have it working well enough under Linux. > Linux has a very steep learning curve. Only if your brain has been damaged by Windows. People who have never used Windows before tend to get on fairly well with Linux when using it for the first time. And Asterisk has a *way* steeper learning curve than Linux. > A Windows application that > would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux > expert user, but it took me years to get here. Yes, it does. I've been using Linux since it was a curiosity on a single floppy disk, and I still have plenty to learn. But at least nobody is actively trying to conceal it from me. > And still, moving from > regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET > framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of > friendliness and on equal footing on performance. Depends what you mean by "friendliness". Human-readable configuration files that I can edit with vi if I have to are friendlier than a drag-and-drool interface, by some measurements. > I don´t mean another > slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I > would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. Asterisk is Free software under the GPL. Anyone is welcome to package it for whatever platform they like. Nobody has bothered to do it because it's actually more effort to persuade Asterisk work on Windows' broken architecture, than it is to learn to use a Unix-like system. TL;DR: It's not our fault if you believe Microsoft's story that you're too stupid to use a real computer. It's certainly not our fault if you have let it come true. -- AJS Answers come *after* questions. -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
I just checked my calendar, and - surprisingly - it's not April 1st! On 4 Dec 2013 23:55, "Gregory Malsack" wrote: > I second that! > > *Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID* > > > Eric Wieling wrote: > > Asterisk is Open Source, any company can port Asterisk to Windows. > Nobody has. Personally, I don't want Digium taking valuable and limited > development resources to create a Windows port. > > -Original Message- > From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto: > asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of CDR > Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 10:19 AM > To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion > Subject: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows > > Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version > of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something > simple to install, they could go public on the product. > Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do > exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but > it took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to > Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET framework and Windows > server 2012 are miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on > performance. I don´t mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk > for windows. In fact, I would invest on the project if somebody wants to do > it. > > -- > _ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New > to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: >http://www.asterisk.org/hello > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > > -- > _ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: >http://www.asterisk.org/hello > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > > -- > _ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: >http://www.asterisk.org/hello > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
On 13-12-04 10:19 AM, CDR wrote: Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something simple to install, they could go public on the product. Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don´t mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. Do you just sit around and think shit up to blame Digium all day? -- Paul Belanger | PolyBeacon, Inc. Jabber: paul.belan...@polybeacon.com | IRC: pabelanger (Freenode) Github: https://github.com/pabelanger | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pabelanger -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
I second that! Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID Eric Wieling wrote: >Asterisk is Open Source, any company can port Asterisk to Windows.Nobody >has. Personally, I don't want Digium taking valuable and limited development >resources to create a Windows port. > >-Original Message- >From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com >[mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of CDR >Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 10:19 AM >To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion >Subject: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows > >Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version of >Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something simple >to install, they could go public on the product. >Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do >exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but it >took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora >20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET framework and Windows server 2012 >are miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I >don´t mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In >fact, I would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. > >-- >_ >-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to >Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: > http://www.asterisk.org/hello > >asterisk-users mailing list >To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > >-- >_ >-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- >New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: > http://www.asterisk.org/hello > >asterisk-users mailing list >To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
Asterisk is Open Source, any company can port Asterisk to Windows.Nobody has. Personally, I don't want Digium taking valuable and limited development resources to create a Windows port. -Original Message- From: asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-boun...@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of CDR Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 10:19 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something simple to install, they could go public on the product. Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don´t mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
On 12/04/2013 10:22 AM, Gregory Malsack wrote: Its beyond disgusting. If it was not for legacy garbage nothing from m$ would be left in my datacenter. Saying you are an expert Linux user is just a joke when you don't understand the poor architectural choices that come with windows and why it can never be a real robust operating system. That's just disgusting If you want to run your phones on WindBlows use lync Should be plenty point and click easy for you On 12/04/2013 09:19 AM, CDR wrote: Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something simple to install, they could go public on the product. Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don´t mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
As per that theory 3CX should have been public by now !! Mitul On Dec 4, 2013 8:49 PM, "CDR" wrote: > Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid > version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, > something simple to install, they could go public on the product. > Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that > would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux > expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from > regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET > framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of > friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don´t mean another > slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I > would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. > > -- > _ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: >http://www.asterisk.org/hello > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
That's just disgusting If you want to run your phones on WindBlows use lync Should be plenty point and click easy for you On 12/04/2013 09:19 AM, CDR wrote: Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something simple to install, they could go public on the product. Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don´t mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something simple to install, they could go public on the product. Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don´t mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. -- _ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
That doesn't make it a better plastform than Linux, but them ITC managers just don't know there's something out there that is more stable, more reliable, less costly, etc. Yes but it doesn't have GENUINE ADVANTAGE :-) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 17:27 -0400, Paul wrote: > As for X on the same box as *, it only seems to affect calls when I do > something that uses enough cpu. I can be logged in with a gnome or kde > desktop without causing problems. It's a P4 2.4 with 1 gb DDR 333. For smaller volumes of calls (10-20 concurrent) I havent had problems with call quality while running X, and many X apps with a AMD 3200+ (1.4GHz) and 512MB ram. You can go fairly low end and still run X as long as you dont run an X operating system (ie one of the window managers that takes 500MB ram by itself). -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel UK +44 870 340 4605 Germany +49 801 777 555 3402 US +1 360 207 0479 or +1 516 687 5200 FreeWorldDialup: 635378 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Christopher Dobbs wrote: Matt wrote: Extremely good point... I myself am a Linux person, but manage several Windows machines (several meaning 25 or so). There is definately a time and place for Windows.. I'm just not sure a real-time-VoIP server is the time or place.Being semi-half serious about the GUI there also.You install X on your Asterisk server and things will not be happy either. I Run SuSE 9.3 with KDE 3.4, Asterisk 1.0.3, play MP3's and OGG's, SAMBA services, HTTPD, VNC, MicroWindows, FTP, SMTP, POP, IMAP, plus others. I dont see that the GUI slows things down to much, unless I am running a test and gring the call volume over 500 active calls. (I am developing a new channel driver for * ment for inclusion in mobile phones, think Asterisk+Cell Phone). The assertion that a GUI will bring a system to it's knee's is utter CRAP! It all has to do whith what the system is doing besides, and what the hardware can handle. BTW: the system this all is running on is an AMD 1700+, and the same system that I am using to brows the mailing list. Agreed. The gui is only one part of the windows performance problem. Also, there are differences between XP home, XP Pro and the windows server products. Anybody porting a real-time app to windows should understand those differences in advance. As for X on the same box as *, it only seems to affect calls when I do something that uses enough cpu. I can be logged in with a gnome or kde desktop without causing problems. It's a P4 2.4 with 1 gb DDR 333. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Matt wrote: Extremely good point... I myself am a Linux person, but manage several Windows machines (several meaning 25 or so). There is definately a time and place for Windows.. I'm just not sure a real-time-VoIP server is the time or place.Being semi-half serious about the GUI there also.You install X on your Asterisk server and things will not be happy either. I Run SuSE 9.3 with KDE 3.4, Asterisk 1.0.3, play MP3's and OGG's, SAMBA services, HTTPD, VNC, MicroWindows, FTP, SMTP, POP, IMAP, plus others. I dont see that the GUI slows things down to much, unless I am running a test and gring the call volume over 500 active calls. (I am developing a new channel driver for * ment for inclusion in mobile phones, think Asterisk+Cell Phone). The assertion that a GUI will bring a system to it's knee's is utter CRAP! It all has to do whith what the system is doing besides, and what the hardware can handle. BTW: the system this all is running on is an AMD 1700+, and the same system that I am using to brows the mailing list. --Christopher Dobbs --I think I think, There for I think I am. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Quit aware of the telecomm industry; spent 21 years in buried in techie detail as an engineer and had a ton of fun. Not sure the overall programming community would agree with real-time vs productivity assessment; lots of folks out there writing production systems on Win32 systems that have rather tight real-time requirements. -Original Message- Good explanation Rich. Unix was built for the riggers of the Telecomm industry. You won't find Windows running the PSTN. Unix and Linux are used where their needed for real time processing and the highest reliably. Windows is a productively OS that is easy to use for non technical people. I use both as do many of us. Each has there purpose. Rich Adamson wrote: Any of the more current Win32 systems can be programmed to handle nearreal-time events (eg, sip, rtp) just like linux, bsd, and other O/S's.Obviously, Call Manager is one such system. It's really not an O/Sreligious war/discussion, but rather a lack of knowledge (on any O/Sthat a poster might not be familiar with) on how to design/implement it in code. With that said, porting the low level drivers (zaptel, wctdm, etc) fromlinux to Win32 is no where near a trevial task, and would basicallyinvolve a complete rewrite of such code. Since there are very fewpeople (maybe one or two) that truly understand _all_ the interworkings of the linux-zaptel drivers, and, I venture to guess those same peopleare not even remotely cognizant (no offense intended at all) of howto write Win32 drivers, don't look for asterisk to be fully portedto the Win32 environment any time soon. As far as I'm concerned, thereisn't any real justification to do so either. A pbx is intended to be a near real-time system and as such should nothave programmers/technicians mucking with it in a production environment.That also suggests that any form of GUI interface that is resident inpbx s/w is not only not required, but not desirable as it will lead tosomeone mucking with it and impacting availability. Running a GUIinterface via a manager (cti or whatever) interface that is not part ofthe real-time pbx environment certainly is doable and has been done onlots of pbx and central office switches over the years regardless of what the underlying O/S happens to be on the switch. Those companies that have implemented near real-time systems have probablyquestioned their choice of O/S years after deploying production systems,but that's perfect 20-20 hindsight. Cisco (as only one example) tends to purchase the majority of their non-core products from other companies (or purchase the entire company), and in a fair number of cases, will attempt to enhance/port that product to something different generating significantly more negatives then ifthey would have left the product alone. I'd be one that would certainlystay away from the port of CCM on another O/S for at least a year. Rich been following this for a while, just thought I would add a bit to the debate, but doesn't the Cisco system (Call Manager?) run on an Windows 2000 based server - if it was that bad why would Cisco choose to run it? Also 3Com use NT/2000 to run the H323 gateway. Admittedly the call processor runs on VXWorks but to cross the boundary of proprietary 3com and rest of world - they jump onto windows. CuriouslyWayne.ps I don't know a great deal about the cisco system - its more hearsay so please jump in on :) Patrick wrote: Reminds me of an Internet Call Diversion pilot WorldCom did back in 2000where Alcatel & some M$ drones brought in 2 very big Alpha serversrunning NT. These boxes needed to be rebooted multiple times. They weresurprised WCOM felt having to reboot these boxes all the time wasunacceptable in an environment requiring 5nines availability. Neverlaughed so hard when I saw the incredulous faces of the M$ drones. Webrought in a Stratus based solution and won the project. ___--Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing listAsterisk-Users@lists.digium.comhttp://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-usersTo UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ---End of Original Message- ___--Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing listAsterisk-Users@lists.digium.comhttp://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-usersTo UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Good explanation Rich. Unix was built for the riggers of the Telecomm industry. You won't find Windows running the PSTN. Unix and Linux are used where their needed for real time processing and the highest reliably. Windows is a productively OS that is easy to use for non technical people. I use both as do many of us. Each has there purpose. Rich Adamson wrote: Any of the more current Win32 systems can be programmed to handle near real-time events (eg, sip, rtp) just like linux, bsd, and other O/S's. Obviously, Call Manager is one such system. It's really not an O/S religious war/discussion, but rather a lack of knowledge (on any O/S that a poster might not be familiar with) on how to design/implement it in code. With that said, porting the low level drivers (zaptel, wctdm, etc) from linux to Win32 is no where near a trevial task, and would basically involve a complete rewrite of such code. Since there are very few people (maybe one or two) that truly understand _all_ the interworkings of the linux-zaptel drivers, and, I venture to guess those same people are not even remotely cognizant (no offense intended at all) of how to write Win32 drivers, don't look for asterisk to be fully ported to the Win32 environment any time soon. As far as I'm concerned, there isn't any real justification to do so either. A pbx is intended to be a near real-time system and as such should not have programmers/technicians mucking with it in a production environment. That also suggests that any form of GUI interface that is resident in pbx s/w is not only not required, but not desirable as it will lead to someone mucking with it and impacting availability. Running a GUI interface via a manager (cti or whatever) interface that is not part of the real-time pbx environment certainly is doable and has been done on lots of pbx and central office switches over the years regardless of what the underlying O/S happens to be on the switch. Those companies that have implemented near real-time systems have probably questioned their choice of O/S years after deploying production systems, but that's perfect 20-20 hindsight. Cisco (as only one example) tends to purchase the majority of their non-core products from other companies (or purchase the entire company), and in a fair number of cases, will attempt to enhance/port that product to something different generating significantly more negatives then if they would have left the product alone. I'd be one that would certainly stay away from the port of CCM on another O/S for at least a year. Rich been following this for a while, just thought I would add a bit to the debate, but doesn't the Cisco system (Call Manager?) run on an Windows 2000 based server - if it was that bad why would Cisco choose to run it? Also 3Com use NT/2000 to run the H323 gateway. Admittedly the call processor runs on VXWorks but to cross the boundary of proprietary 3com and rest of world - they jump onto windows. Curiously Wayne. ps I don't know a great deal about the cisco system - its more hearsay so please jump in on :) Patrick wrote: Reminds me of an Internet Call Diversion pilot WorldCom did back in 2000 where Alcatel & some M$ drones brought in 2 very big Alpha servers running NT. These boxes needed to be rebooted multiple times. They were surprised WCOM felt having to reboot these boxes all the time was unacceptable in an environment requiring 5nines availability. Never laughed so hard when I saw the incredulous faces of the M$ drones. We brought in a Stratus based solution and won the project. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ---End of Original Message- ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Any of the more current Win32 systems can be programmed to handle near real-time events (eg, sip, rtp) just like linux, bsd, and other O/S's. Obviously, Call Manager is one such system. It's really not an O/S religious war/discussion, but rather a lack of knowledge (on any O/S that a poster might not be familiar with) on how to design/implement it in code. With that said, porting the low level drivers (zaptel, wctdm, etc) from linux to Win32 is no where near a trevial task, and would basically involve a complete rewrite of such code. Since there are very few people (maybe one or two) that truly understand _all_ the interworkings of the linux-zaptel drivers, and, I venture to guess those same people are not even remotely cognizant (no offense intended at all) of how to write Win32 drivers, don't look for asterisk to be fully ported to the Win32 environment any time soon. As far as I'm concerned, there isn't any real justification to do so either. A pbx is intended to be a near real-time system and as such should not have programmers/technicians mucking with it in a production environment. That also suggests that any form of GUI interface that is resident in pbx s/w is not only not required, but not desirable as it will lead to someone mucking with it and impacting availability. Running a GUI interface via a manager (cti or whatever) interface that is not part of the real-time pbx environment certainly is doable and has been done on lots of pbx and central office switches over the years regardless of what the underlying O/S happens to be on the switch. Those companies that have implemented near real-time systems have probably questioned their choice of O/S years after deploying production systems, but that's perfect 20-20 hindsight. Cisco (as only one example) tends to purchase the majority of their non-core products from other companies (or purchase the entire company), and in a fair number of cases, will attempt to enhance/port that product to something different generating significantly more negatives then if they would have left the product alone. I'd be one that would certainly stay away from the port of CCM on another O/S for at least a year. Rich > been following this for a while, just thought I would add a bit to the > debate, but doesn't the Cisco system (Call Manager?) run on an Windows > 2000 based server - if it was that bad why would Cisco choose to run it? > Also 3Com use NT/2000 to run the H323 gateway. Admittedly the call > processor runs on VXWorks but to cross the boundary of proprietary 3com > and rest of world - they jump onto windows. > > Curiously > Wayne. > ps I don't know a great deal about the cisco system - its more hearsay > so please jump in on :) > > Patrick wrote: > > >Reminds me of an Internet Call Diversion pilot WorldCom did back in 2000 > >where Alcatel & some M$ drones brought in 2 very big Alpha servers > >running NT. These boxes needed to be rebooted multiple times. They were > >surprised WCOM felt having to reboot these boxes all the time was > >unacceptable in an environment requiring 5nines availability. Never > >laughed so hard when I saw the incredulous faces of the M$ drones. We > >brought in a Stratus based solution and won the project. > > > ___ > --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- > > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > ---End of Original Message- ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Wayne wrote: Hiyall, been following this for a while, just thought I would add a bit to the debate, but doesn't the Cisco system (Call Manager?) run on an Windows 2000 based server - if it was that bad why would Cisco choose to run it? Also 3Com use NT/2000 to run the H323 gateway. Admittedly the call processor runs on VXWorks but to cross the boundary of proprietary 3com and rest of world - they jump onto windows. Funny you should bring that up. We frequently have to reboot our system for stability reasons. Our last issue was the server freaked out and all the phones time displays were showing weird characters, no calling out. Calling into the system from an outside number, resulted in a 2nd dial tone. We were able to make long distance calls via that second dial tone. Had to reboot the system to recover. I'll stick with a *NIX based OS. Doug ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
On Sun, October 2, 2005 12:07, Patrick said: > On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 10:21 +0100, Wayne wrote: >> Hiyall, >> been following this for a while, just thought I would add a bit to the >> debate, but doesn't the Cisco system (Call Manager?) run on an Windows >> 2000 based server - if it was that bad why would Cisco choose to run it? > > Politics and cluelessness. There are rumours that Cisco's next CCM will > run Linux. Cisco also used Win2000 on their BBSM product. An amazing > piece of crap according to those who had to install it and maintain it. > You had to reboot the thing over and over. Sounds familiar? > >> Also 3Com use NT/2000 to run the H323 gateway. Admittedly the call >> processor runs on VXWorks but to cross the boundary of proprietary 3com >> and rest of world - they jump onto windows. > > VWWorks is as stable as it gets compared to M$. At least they had the > brains to put the important part on a Unix like OS. About the M$ part, > well, it's silly decisions like that that contribute to 3Com's fading > away. > > Regards, > Patrick > *shrugs* SonicWALL (firewall company) have always had their Global Management System on Sun/Oracle and M$/SQL2000... The first combination was more stable from the onset, but the second has been sold many more times, at some point even pushing away development-time for the Sun/Oracle combination in favor of M$/SQL2000. They'd probably have dropped it if it hadn't been in use at a few very large sites (obviously run by people that *did* have a clue what they were doing!) >From the onset there have also been many crying for a Linux version, but again, M$/SQL2000 development took so much time, I still haven't seen a glimpse of it! Sometimes a company just doesn't have a choice, and in a market dominated by M$ manipulation, ehrr... monopolisation, you're quickly condemned to M$ if you need to sell to a large market! That doesn't make it a better plastform than Linux, but them ITC managers just don't know there's something out there that is more stable, more reliable, less costly, etc. -- Francesco Peeters GPG Key = AA69 E7C6 1D8A F148 160C D5C4 9943 6E38 D5E3 7704 If your program doesn't recognize my signature, please visit http://www.CAcert.org/index.php?id=3 to retrieve the Root CA certificate. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Steve wrote: > Cisco seem to be moving their CCM users to Linux. At least I have heard > of a few users going that way, after Cisco recommended it. There have been unofficial statements that CCM would move to a Unix-like OS, but that would be in the next major release, still some time off. Over the last few years Cisco has taken to making major announcements at the Cisco IPTel User Group meeting. This years is in Las Vegas during the first week of December, so this rumor may soon gain official validation. I know I would not mind hearing it > CCM doesn't usually handle anything near to hard real-time, so it is a > lot less demanding than something like Asterisk. I started to respond to this having first read real-time as realtime, it took a moment to adjust my thinking. Unless a business chooses to implement the limited IVR solution on one of their CCM servers, CCM does not handle media streams. So the software does not need to deal with high priority real-time traffic > Regards, > Steve Dan ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 10:21 +0100, Wayne wrote: >> Hiyall, >> been following this for a while, just thought I would add a bit to the >> debate, but doesn't the Cisco system (Call Manager?) run on an Windows >> 2000 based server - if it was that bad why would Cisco choose to run it? > Politics and cluelessness. There are rumours that Cisco's next CCM will > run Linux. Cisco also used Win2000 on their BBSM product. An amazing > piece of crap according to those who had to install it and maintain it. > You had to reboot the thing over and over. Sounds familiar? Cisco actually aqcuired the product that was to become CCM from Selsius. It was already written for and running on Windwows. Pretty standard business fare. Buy a product line, rebrand it, make money, maybe make it better over time. Even with what I think most of us recognize the technical issues, it has been a lucrative product for Cisco >> Also 3Com use NT/2000 to run the H323 gateway. Admittedly the call >> processor runs on VXWorks but to cross the boundary of proprietary 3com >> and rest of world - they jump onto windows. > VWWorks is as stable as it gets compared to M$. At least they had the > brains to put the important part on a Unix like OS. About the M$ part, > well, it's silly decisions like that that contribute to 3Com's fading > away. > Regards, > Patrick Dan ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Cisco Call Manager does indeed run on Windows 2000. There are positive and negative facets with this arrangement. Postive: - Easier for your average IT engineer to install - Easier for the same person to maintain - Using MS SQL Server allows for replication and a workable clustering strategty out of the box - Only supported on certified hardware Negative: - The OS cannot be patched with MS fixes * The issue is support from Cisco, so only MS patches that Cisco certifies and publishes can be applied. - MS SQL Server 2000 is a memory pig - Massive and cryptic log files, debugging odd behavior can be amazing difficult - Only supported on certified hardware Now with these 'facts' in mind, the latest release is extremely stable if you have enough memory to keep SQL Server happy. The management interface is fairly well designed, and allows for granular access, so a companies help desk staff can be trained on performing adds/moves/changes without putting the core dialplan or infrastructure in their hands Cisco's SCCP protocol uses RTP, and allows media re-invites, but stays in the signalling path. So the system does not deal directly with codecs or transcoding, so scalability is releatively good. And should the server crash in the middle of calls, the calls are not interrupted. New calls cannot start, but disconnects do not happen. I listed the certified hardware requirement as both a postive and negative. It does limit choices, but with Cisco's process of validating both the OS and hardware, the is a very limited exposure that a bad driver can be introduced to reduce stability. Even though it is a workable system, Cisco has indicated that a future release MAY be appliance like running on a 'Unix-like' OS. So it is possible to run a telephony system on Windows, and get reasonable performance. It can be a challenge, but no more or less so than on a Unix-like system. It is even likely that if Cisco moved the base OS to 2003 Server, stability would improve. Now after all of that, I would want people to think I am suggesting porting * to Windows would be as successful. It works for Cisco largely because they can afford to certify and validate the platform, something a volunteer community find increasingly difficult. Dan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wayne Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 2:22 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows Hiyall, been following this for a while, just thought I would add a bit to the debate, but doesn't the Cisco system (Call Manager?) run on an Windows 2000 based server - if it was that bad why would Cisco choose to run it? Also 3Com use NT/2000 to run the H323 gateway. Admittedly the call processor runs on VXWorks but to cross the boundary of proprietary 3com and rest of world - they jump onto windows. Curiously Wayne. ps I don't know a great deal about the cisco system - its more hearsay so please jump in on :) Patrick wrote: >Reminds me of an Internet Call Diversion pilot WorldCom did back in 2000 >where Alcatel & some M$ drones brought in 2 very big Alpha servers >running NT. These boxes needed to be rebooted multiple times. They were >surprised WCOM felt having to reboot these boxes all the time was >unacceptable in an environment requiring 5nines availability. Never >laughed so hard when I saw the incredulous faces of the M$ drones. We >brought in a Stratus based solution and won the project. > ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Cisco seem to be moving their CCM users to Linux. At least I have heard of a few users going that way, after Cisco recommended it. CCM doesn't usually handle anything near to hard real-time, so it is a lot less demanding than something like Asterisk. Regards, Steve Wayne wrote: Hiyall, been following this for a while, just thought I would add a bit to the debate, but doesn't the Cisco system (Call Manager?) run on an Windows 2000 based server - if it was that bad why would Cisco choose to run it? Also 3Com use NT/2000 to run the H323 gateway. Admittedly the call processor runs on VXWorks but to cross the boundary of proprietary 3com and rest of world - they jump onto windows. Curiously Wayne. ps I don't know a great deal about the cisco system - its more hearsay so please jump in on :) Patrick wrote: Reminds me of an Internet Call Diversion pilot WorldCom did back in 2000 where Alcatel & some M$ drones brought in 2 very big Alpha servers running NT. These boxes needed to be rebooted multiple times. They were surprised WCOM felt having to reboot these boxes all the time was unacceptable in an environment requiring 5nines availability. Never laughed so hard when I saw the incredulous faces of the M$ drones. We brought in a Stratus based solution and won the project. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 10:21 +0100, Wayne wrote: > Hiyall, > been following this for a while, just thought I would add a bit to the > debate, but doesn't the Cisco system (Call Manager?) run on an Windows > 2000 based server - if it was that bad why would Cisco choose to run it? Politics and cluelessness. There are rumours that Cisco's next CCM will run Linux. Cisco also used Win2000 on their BBSM product. An amazing piece of crap according to those who had to install it and maintain it. You had to reboot the thing over and over. Sounds familiar? > Also 3Com use NT/2000 to run the H323 gateway. Admittedly the call > processor runs on VXWorks but to cross the boundary of proprietary 3com > and rest of world - they jump onto windows. VWWorks is as stable as it gets compared to M$. At least they had the brains to put the important part on a Unix like OS. About the M$ part, well, it's silly decisions like that that contribute to 3Com's fading away. Regards, Patrick ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Hiyall, been following this for a while, just thought I would add a bit to the debate, but doesn't the Cisco system (Call Manager?) run on an Windows 2000 based server - if it was that bad why would Cisco choose to run it? Also 3Com use NT/2000 to run the H323 gateway. Admittedly the call processor runs on VXWorks but to cross the boundary of proprietary 3com and rest of world - they jump onto windows. Curiously Wayne. ps I don't know a great deal about the cisco system - its more hearsay so please jump in on :) Patrick wrote: Reminds me of an Internet Call Diversion pilot WorldCom did back in 2000 where Alcatel & some M$ drones brought in 2 very big Alpha servers running NT. These boxes needed to be rebooted multiple times. They were surprised WCOM felt having to reboot these boxes all the time was unacceptable in an environment requiring 5nines availability. Never laughed so hard when I saw the incredulous faces of the M$ drones. We brought in a Stratus based solution and won the project. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: Asterisk + 99.999s was (Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows)
Patrick wrote: On Sat, 2005-10-01 at 08:31 -0400, Julio Arruda wrote: [snip] One thing interesting, coming from data background, seeing the requirements in carrier voice networks. Is a quite distinct ball-game. Devices that require 'hot-software-upgrades', still not that often seen in data. How is this being handled with Asterisk + other solutions ? Example, having a trunk gateway with a OC3 worth of TDM, is 'acceptable' that a sw upgrade will cut established calls ? Iirc Motorola has a solution that allows in-operation linux kernel upgrades. No idea how they pulled that magic off (and if it actually works). At VON IBM was going to demo a blade based Asterisk solution that has auto-failover of calls so maybe that could also be used to upgrade software. Don't have more info about this IBM solution. If you have a DS3 or OC3 worth of TDM calls then it probably makes sense to use a carrier-class box. Weird as it seems, not sure if the softswitch itself is the problem. Example, you could have a media gateway where the established calls are not torn down during a software upgrade of the Media Gateway controller 'entity'. The hardest part is the media gateway failover, I'm only familiar with Nortel (I work in Nortel) MG, and they in some cases would do these with APS and 1:1 sparing of the cards, where the sw migration is a 'hitless process', I assume others have similar options, but again, is not exactly 'in the asterisk' only, is in more than that, is in the 'solution'. Regards, Patrick ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: Asterisk + 99.999s was (Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows)
On Sat, 2005-10-01 at 08:31 -0400, Julio Arruda wrote: [snip] > One thing interesting, coming from data background, seeing the > requirements in carrier voice networks. Is a quite distinct ball-game. > Devices that require 'hot-software-upgrades', still not that often seen > in data. How is this being handled with Asterisk + other solutions ? > Example, having a trunk gateway with a OC3 worth of TDM, is 'acceptable' > that a sw upgrade will cut established calls ? Iirc Motorola has a solution that allows in-operation linux kernel upgrades. No idea how they pulled that magic off (and if it actually works). At VON IBM was going to demo a blade based Asterisk solution that has auto-failover of calls so maybe that could also be used to upgrade software. Don't have more info about this IBM solution. If you have a DS3 or OC3 worth of TDM calls then it probably makes sense to use a carrier-class box. Regards, Patrick ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Asterisk + 99.999s was (Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows)
Patrick wrote: On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 23:17 +0800, Steve Underwood wrote: [snip] An effective DOS attack on a $300,000 Alpha running NT I used to use was "wiggle the mouse" :-) I never really understood how that brought a multi-CPU machine to a standstill, but it did. Reminds me of an Internet Call Diversion pilot WorldCom did back in 2000 where Alcatel & some M$ drones brought in 2 very big Alpha servers running NT. These boxes needed to be rebooted multiple times. They were surprised WCOM felt having to reboot these boxes all the time was unacceptable in an environment requiring 5nines availability. Never laughed so hard when I saw the incredulous faces of the M$ drones. We brought in a Stratus based solution and won the project. Alcatel folks where not surprised, I'm sure ;-) One thing interesting, coming from data background, seeing the requirements in carrier voice networks. Is a quite distinct ball-game. Devices that require 'hot-software-upgrades', still not that often seen in data. How is this being handled with Asterisk + other solutions ? Example, having a trunk gateway with a OC3 worth of TDM, is 'acceptable' that a sw upgrade will cut established calls ? ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 23:17 +0800, Steve Underwood wrote: [snip] > An effective DOS attack on a $300,000 Alpha running NT I used to use was > "wiggle the mouse" :-) I never really understood how that brought a > multi-CPU machine to a standstill, but it did. Reminds me of an Internet Call Diversion pilot WorldCom did back in 2000 where Alcatel & some M$ drones brought in 2 very big Alpha servers running NT. These boxes needed to be rebooted multiple times. They were surprised WCOM felt having to reboot these boxes all the time was unacceptable in an environment requiring 5nines availability. Never laughed so hard when I saw the incredulous faces of the M$ drones. We brought in a Stratus based solution and won the project. Regards, Patrick ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
It ran good because Exchange 5.5 was ported to Alpha natively. Anything else that had to thunk to the emulation layer blew dead goats, as emulation tends to do. Alpha was great, don't get me wrong, but industry politics (Intel posturing, DEC aquisition by Compaq) dictated that Microsoft had to half-ass the job. Personally, I was hoping that the CHRP platform would take hold. Funny how things come in a circle what with Apple abandoning PowerPC and OSX loading on Dells. -Original Message- From: Justin Selleck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 12:24 PM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows I disagree - I ran exchange 5.5 on a digital alpha using windows nt. At the time it was the most reliable NT system I had ever seen and it ran faster than any i386 system. Personally I wish MS would have continued development on it. -Justin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colin Anderson Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 11:57 AM To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion' Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows Not to mention NT on Alpha and CHRP was a joke, the GUI was not native code and proper drivers were non existient. At the time MS was hedging their bets because it looked like CHRP / Alpha might be going somewhere. I had for a while a Motorola CHRP machine with Daytona on it and it was utter crap but it was a "let's throw it up there and see what sticks" situation. I also got to eval a "flippy" board with a P-90 AND a 603, reboot and it would ask you which proc you wanted to use. Was it Orange Micro that had that?? wow 10 years ago seems like a lifetime. -Original Message- From: Tony Hoyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 9:59 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows Rich Adamson wrote: > Both probably resulted from some untested/unexpected activity the > developer never addressed for whatever reason. Moving the mouse?? lol. Actually I remember this problem on NT4.. the mouse driver used to drag the system down completely.. it was a complete resource hog. Tony ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
>So how does that explain muslims blowing themselves up and taking as many >non-believers with them as possible? I don't see any of them trying to >convert anyone. Is this a bug in Linux? Duuno if you're trying for subtle humor there, otherwise... **whoosh** ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
The religious Zealot was catholic or more accurately speaking, a Zehova's witness -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of canuck15 > So how does that explain muslims blowing themselves up and taking as many non-believers with them as possible? I don't see any of them trying to convert anyone. Is this a bug in Linux? I'm not sure if this is a bit off topic but I apologize if it is. ;) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not waive confidentiality or privilege, and use is prohibited. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
I disagree - I ran exchange 5.5 on a digital alpha using windows nt. At the time it was the most reliable NT system I had ever seen and it ran faster than any i386 system. Personally I wish MS would have continued development on it. -Justin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colin Anderson Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 11:57 AM To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion' Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows Not to mention NT on Alpha and CHRP was a joke, the GUI was not native code and proper drivers were non existient. At the time MS was hedging their bets because it looked like CHRP / Alpha might be going somewhere. I had for a while a Motorola CHRP machine with Daytona on it and it was utter crap but it was a "let's throw it up there and see what sticks" situation. I also got to eval a "flippy" board with a P-90 AND a 603, reboot and it would ask you which proc you wanted to use. Was it Orange Micro that had that?? wow 10 years ago seems like a lifetime. -Original Message- From: Tony Hoyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 9:59 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows Rich Adamson wrote: > Both probably resulted from some untested/unexpected activity the > developer never addressed for whatever reason. Moving the mouse?? lol. Actually I remember this problem on NT4.. the mouse driver used to drag the system down completely.. it was a complete resource hog. Tony ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
> -Original Message- > From: Colin Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 8:41 AM > To: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion' > Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows > > [me shrugs] > > I read an interesting quote the other day, can't remember where: > > "A religious zealot subconsiously realizes his position is > fundamentally irrational, so he tries to convert other people > to religion in order to validate that position" > > :%s/religion/linux/g > So how does that explain muslims blowing themselves up and taking as many non-believers with them as possible? I don't see any of them trying to convert anyone. Is this a bug in Linux? I'm not sure if this is a bit off topic but I apologize if it is. ;) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Not to mention NT on Alpha and CHRP was a joke, the GUI was not native code and proper drivers were non existient. At the time MS was hedging their bets because it looked like CHRP / Alpha might be going somewhere. I had for a while a Motorola CHRP machine with Daytona on it and it was utter crap but it was a "let's throw it up there and see what sticks" situation. I also got to eval a "flippy" board with a P-90 AND a 603, reboot and it would ask you which proc you wanted to use. Was it Orange Micro that had that?? wow 10 years ago seems like a lifetime. -Original Message- From: Tony Hoyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 9:59 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows Rich Adamson wrote: > Both probably resulted from some untested/unexpected activity the > developer never addressed for whatever reason. Moving the mouse?? lol. Actually I remember this problem on NT4.. the mouse driver used to drag the system down completely.. it was a complete resource hog. Tony ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
> > > Why on earth would you want to run it on Windows? First off, your > > > performance is going to go down because of the GUI... oh your call > > > quality just went down the toilet? Yeah sorry the screen saver just > > > kicked in. Having issues making calls? Oh sorry we had to reboot > > > for a critical update. Yeah I know audio isn't working right, the > > > swap file is a little large right now, we need to reboot. > > > > > > Are you on crack?!?! Asterisk runs well on Linux because > > of the lack > > > of a GUI... sleek simple interface (text) to it. Linux is free, > > > windows adds a license cost. Since you shouldn't be running any > > > other applications on the server anyway, why not just > > install Linux? > > > Trying to run it on windows seems like a bad idea to me. > > > > Most of the above certainly is focused on generating another > > religious war relative to operating systems, etc, that has > > little factual basis. > > > > For those of us that really don't care about such wars, there > > have been plenty of Linux apps that have been ported to > > Win32, several of which are run in production environments > > (at high usage rates) without the difficulties or the reboots > > noted above. Many Win32 apps run in a high- visibility > > high-security production environment (such as intrusion > > detection systems, vpn hosts, etc), and can be secured "if" > > the sys admin knows what they are doing. > > > > Asterisk has been ported to Win32 systems, however the real > > reason why such ports are not considered production quality > > has its roots in the device drivers required to drive digium > > cards and associated critical timing routines; nothing more, > > nothing less. The device driver porting is not a trivial task. > > > > Personally, I could care less which O/S the stuff runs on as > > long as it runs reliably, and the sys admin understands how > > to manage whatever sytem he/she is responsible for. > > I have not declared a jihad against Windows myself but by your own admission > Rich, you have excluded Windows. The GUI is integral with the OS and > therein lies one of the main reasons that critical timing routines are > basically impossible in Win32. Same problems arise when you run Xwindows in > Linux but the key point is that you can chose NOT to install/run Xwindows in > Linux. The point I was trying to make is that one _can_ write code for any of the mentioned O/S's to accomplish about anything that one wants, including running sensitive apps with GUI, etc. (Sniffer being able to truly analyze packets in a GUI environment at full nic speed was the example. Lots of other examples for other O/S's as well.) For the work that I do, my laptop is a triple boot system that includes multiple Win32 systems and linux. I'm very happy working with whatever system gets the job down. :) ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Rich Adamson wrote: Both probably resulted from some untested/unexpected activity the developer never addressed for whatever reason. Moving the mouse?? lol. Actually I remember this problem on NT4.. the mouse driver used to drag the system down completely.. it was a complete resource hog. Tony ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
> -Original Message- > From: Rich Adamson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 7:43 AM > To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion > Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows > > > > Why on earth would you want to run it on Windows? First off, your > > performance is going to go down because of the GUI... oh your call > > quality just went down the toilet? Yeah sorry the screen saver just > > kicked in. Having issues making calls? Oh sorry we had to reboot > > for a critical update. Yeah I know audio isn't working right, the > > swap file is a little large right now, we need to reboot. > > > > Are you on crack?!?! Asterisk runs well on Linux because > of the lack > > of a GUI... sleek simple interface (text) to it. Linux is free, > > windows adds a license cost. Since you shouldn't be running any > > other applications on the server anyway, why not just > install Linux? > > Trying to run it on windows seems like a bad idea to me. > > Most of the above certainly is focused on generating another > religious war relative to operating systems, etc, that has > little factual basis. > > For those of us that really don't care about such wars, there > have been plenty of Linux apps that have been ported to > Win32, several of which are run in production environments > (at high usage rates) without the difficulties or the reboots > noted above. Many Win32 apps run in a high- visibility > high-security production environment (such as intrusion > detection systems, vpn hosts, etc), and can be secured "if" > the sys admin knows what they are doing. > > Asterisk has been ported to Win32 systems, however the real > reason why such ports are not considered production quality > has its roots in the device drivers required to drive digium > cards and associated critical timing routines; nothing more, > nothing less. The device driver porting is not a trivial task. > > Personally, I could care less which O/S the stuff runs on as > long as it runs reliably, and the sys admin understands how > to manage whatever sytem he/she is responsible for. I have not declared a jihad against Windows myself but by your own admission Rich, you have excluded Windows. The GUI is integral with the OS and therein lies one of the main reasons that critical timing routines are basically impossible in Win32. Same problems arise when you run Xwindows in Linux but the key point is that you can chose NOT to install/run Xwindows in Linux. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
[me shrugs] I read an interesting quote the other day, can't remember where: "A religious zealot subconsiously realizes his position is fundamentally irrational, so he tries to convert other people to religion in order to validate that position" :%s/religion/linux/g Far as I'm concerned, right tool for the right job. DHCP? Linux. Groupware? Windows. Firewall? BSD. Graphics? Mac. Low cost, ultra flexible kick ass telephony? Asterisk / Linux. >An effective DOS attack on a $300,000 Alpha running NT I used to use was >"wiggle the mouse" :-) I never really understood how that brought a >multi-CPU machine to a standstill, but it did. An effective DOS attack on a Linux box: su root cd / rm -rf * Every platform has a weakness. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
> >>Personally, I could care less which O/S the stuff runs on as long as > >>it runs reliably, and the sys admin understands how to manage whatever > >>sytem he/she is responsible for. > >> > > > >Extremely good point... I myself am a Linux person, but manage several > >Windows machines (several meaning 25 or so). There is definately a > >time and place for Windows.. I'm just not sure a real-time-VoIP server > >is the time or place.Being semi-half serious about the GUI there > >also.You install X on your Asterisk server and things will not be > >happy either. > > > > > An effective DOS attack on a $300,000 Alpha running NT I used to use was > "wiggle the mouse" :-) I never really understood how that brought a > multi-CPU machine to a standstill, but it did. Yup, and so does one incorrect statement in zapata.conf. ;) Both probably resulted from some untested/unexpected activity the developer never addressed for whatever reason. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
> > Personally, I could care less which O/S the stuff runs on as long as > > it runs reliably, and the sys admin understands how to manage whatever > > sytem he/she is responsible for. > > Extremely good point... I myself am a Linux person, but manage several > Windows machines (several meaning 25 or so). There is definately a > time and place for Windows.. I'm just not sure a real-time-VoIP server > is the time or place. The real-time issues can be addressed reliably as proven by several very well respected Win32 apps including Sniffer technologies. As a long-time professional services provider, if I miss even one packet (at full nic speed) with a sniffer on Win32, I would not be able to do my job. And as a reminder, lan packets captured by sniffer _don't_ occur every 20 ms or whatever. The same can _not_ be said of TDM drivers on any linux system (as yet anyway). Regardless of the O/S, it still boils down to using the skills necessary to accomplish the development goals. Application developers don't make good device driver programmers; those good at linux driver development don't make good Win32 device driver programmers; and, those good at Win32 device driver development don't make good linux driver developers. (I'm sure there are some exceptions, but those individuals are far and few between without a shadow of a doubt.) > Being semi-half serious about the GUI there > also.You install X on your Asterisk server and things will not be > happy either. GUI interfaces (including X) are not a problem by themselves. E.g., if X is running and not heavily used, its not a problem for linux distro's assuming the sys admin knows what they are doing with the hardware and software. Same with Win32. I'm certainly not taking any position on porting Asterisk to Win32; I'm happly with it on linux, but I wouldn't trade my Win32 Sniffer for Ethereal either. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Sounds like an IRQ conflict! On 9/28/05, Steve Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matt wrote: > > >>Personally, I could care less which O/S the stuff runs on as long as > >>it runs reliably, and the sys admin understands how to manage whatever > >>sytem he/she is responsible for. > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >Extremely good point... I myself am a Linux person, but manage several > >Windows machines (several meaning 25 or so). There is definately a > >time and place for Windows.. I'm just not sure a real-time-VoIP server > >is the time or place.Being semi-half serious about the GUI there > >also.You install X on your Asterisk server and things will not be > >happy either. > > > > > An effective DOS attack on a $300,000 Alpha running NT I used to use was > "wiggle the mouse" :-) I never really understood how that brought a > multi-CPU machine to a standstill, but it did. > > Regards, > Steve > > ___ > --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- > > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Matt wrote: Personally, I could care less which O/S the stuff runs on as long as it runs reliably, and the sys admin understands how to manage whatever sytem he/she is responsible for. Extremely good point... I myself am a Linux person, but manage several Windows machines (several meaning 25 or so). There is definately a time and place for Windows.. I'm just not sure a real-time-VoIP server is the time or place.Being semi-half serious about the GUI there also.You install X on your Asterisk server and things will not be happy either. An effective DOS attack on a $300,000 Alpha running NT I used to use was "wiggle the mouse" :-) I never really understood how that brought a multi-CPU machine to a standstill, but it did. Regards, Steve ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Could not agree more with Matt. I have been a linux geek for a long time and I would think twice before calling Windows a crap o/s as linux feels crappier when it comes to usability, administration and the pain in making it work the first time, with due respect to all those who are contributing to the open source revolution. Seshu Kanuri -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2005 11:00 AM To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows > > Personally, I could care less which O/S the stuff runs on as long as > it runs reliably, and the sys admin understands how to manage whatever > sytem he/she is responsible for. > > Extremely good point... I myself am a Linux person, but manage several Windows machines (several meaning 25 or so). There is definately a time and place for Windows.. I'm just not sure a real-time-VoIP server is the time or place.Being semi-half serious about the GUI there also.You install X on your Asterisk server and things will not be happy either. NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not waive confidentiality or privilege, and use is prohibited. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
> > Personally, I could care less which O/S the stuff runs on as long as > it runs reliably, and the sys admin understands how to manage whatever > sytem he/she is responsible for. > > Extremely good point... I myself am a Linux person, but manage several Windows machines (several meaning 25 or so). There is definately a time and place for Windows.. I'm just not sure a real-time-VoIP server is the time or place.Being semi-half serious about the GUI there also.You install X on your Asterisk server and things will not be happy either. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
> Why on earth would you want to run it on Windows? First off, your > performance is going to go down because of the GUI... oh your call > quality just went down the toilet? Yeah sorry the screen saver just > kicked in. Having issues making calls? Oh sorry we had to reboot > for a critical update. Yeah I know audio isn't working right, the > swap file is a little large right now, we need to reboot. > > Are you on crack?!?! Asterisk runs well on Linux because of the lack > of a GUI... sleek simple interface (text) to it. Linux is free, > windows adds a license cost. Since you shouldn't be running any > other applications on the server anyway, why not just install Linux? > Trying to run it on windows seems like a bad idea to me. Most of the above certainly is focused on generating another religious war relative to operating systems, etc, that has little factual basis. For those of us that really don't care about such wars, there have been plenty of Linux apps that have been ported to Win32, several of which are run in production environments (at high usage rates) without the difficulties or the reboots noted above. Many Win32 apps run in a high- visibility high-security production environment (such as intrusion detection systems, vpn hosts, etc), and can be secured "if" the sys admin knows what they are doing. Asterisk has been ported to Win32 systems, however the real reason why such ports are not considered production quality has its roots in the device drivers required to drive digium cards and associated critical timing routines; nothing more, nothing less. The device driver porting is not a trivial task. Personally, I could care less which O/S the stuff runs on as long as it runs reliably, and the sys admin understands how to manage whatever sytem he/she is responsible for. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Matt wrote: Why on earth would you want to run it on Windows? First off, your performance is going to go down because of the GUI... oh your call quality just went down the toilet? Yeah sorry the screen saver just kicked in. Having issues making calls? Oh sorry we had to reboot for a critical update. Yeah I know audio isn't working right, the swap file is a little large right now, we need to reboot. Are you on crack?!?! Asterisk runs well on Linux because of the lack of a GUI... sleek simple interface (text) to it. Linux is free, windows adds a license cost. Since you shouldn't be running any other applications on the server anyway, why not just install Linux? Trying to run it on windows seems like a bad idea to me. I think this poor user saw the 2.0 announcement and thought it was real. Somebody should change that to 13.0 instead, I nearly freaked when I saw it until I realized it was a joke. -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only) http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II) http://linuxha.blogspot.com/My HA Blog ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Or even . http://www.asteriskwin32.com/ ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 14:14, Kanishka Somaratne wrote: > why can't we compile the asterisk coading in windows, it's done in c++ so > it should work in windows as well oh, and did you try google? how about this: http://www.digium.com/index.php?menu=astwind it's a bit of a cheat though 'cause its using coLinux > > ___ > --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- > > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
RE : [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Just press Ctrl-Alt-Del Usual on windows ;) Olivier -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Matt Envoyé : mercredi 28 septembre 2005 15:22 À : Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion Objet : Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows Why on earth would you want to run it on Windows? First off, your performance is going to go down because of the GUI... oh your call quality just went down the toilet? Yeah sorry the screen saver just kicked in. Having issues making calls? Oh sorry we had to reboot for a critical update. Yeah I know audio isn't working right, the swap file is a little large right now, we need to reboot. Are you on crack?!?! Asterisk runs well on Linux because of the lack of a GUI... sleek simple interface (text) to it. Linux is free, windows adds a license cost. Since you shouldn't be running any other applications on the server anyway, why not just install Linux? Trying to run it on windows seems like a bad idea to me. On 9/28/05, Kanishka Somaratne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > why can't we compile the asterisk coading in windows, it's done in c++ > so it should work in windows as well > > ___ > --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- > > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
Why on earth would you want to run it on Windows? First off, your performance is going to go down because of the GUI... oh your call quality just went down the toilet? Yeah sorry the screen saver just kicked in. Having issues making calls? Oh sorry we had to reboot for a critical update. Yeah I know audio isn't working right, the swap file is a little large right now, we need to reboot. Are you on crack?!?! Asterisk runs well on Linux because of the lack of a GUI... sleek simple interface (text) to it. Linux is free, windows adds a license cost. Since you shouldn't be running any other applications on the server anyway, why not just install Linux? Trying to run it on windows seems like a bad idea to me. On 9/28/05, Kanishka Somaratne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > why can't we compile the asterisk coading in windows, it's done in c++ so it > should work in windows as well > > ___ > --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- > > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
Re: [Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 14:14, Kanishka Somaratne wrote: > why can't we compile the asterisk coading in windows, it's done in c++ so it's written in C... have you bothered to look at the source code? ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
[Asterisk-Users] Asterisk on windows
why can't we compile the asterisk coading in windows, it's done in c++ so it should work in windows as well ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
