Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
From: Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com To: FreeBSD freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: Wed, June 22, 2011 11:26:30 PM Subject: Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD? Hey guys.this thread is really starting to stink. Take it outside. On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:08:59PM -0500, David Scheidt wrote: On Jun 20, 2011, at 10:46 AM, Chad Perrin wrote: . . . and, somehow, social convention tells me it would be rude to let this person know (for next time) that everything will be much easier for everyone if the data is just left in its original format. Oh, I'd have sent an email saying sorry, your data is not in the required format. See the requirements at (url, or other way where it's specified.). If you didn't specify the format, well, stop bitching, because it's your own fault. You appear prone to leaping to assumption and being kind of an asshole. I specified the format. This is not, however, a strictly business relationship -- so different social rules apply, much to my dismay. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Jun 20, 2011, at 10:46 AM, Chad Perrin wrote: . . . and, somehow, social convention tells me it would be rude to let this person know (for next time) that everything will be much easier for everyone if the data is just left in its original format. Oh, I'd have sent an email saying sorry, your data is not in the required format. See the requirements at (url, or other way where it's specified.). If you didn't specify the format, well, stop bitching, because it's your own fault. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:08:59PM -0500, David Scheidt wrote: On Jun 20, 2011, at 10:46 AM, Chad Perrin wrote: . . . and, somehow, social convention tells me it would be rude to let this person know (for next time) that everything will be much easier for everyone if the data is just left in its original format. Oh, I'd have sent an email saying sorry, your data is not in the required format. See the requirements at (url, or other way where it's specified.). If you didn't specify the format, well, stop bitching, because it's your own fault. You appear prone to leaping to assumption and being kind of an asshole. I specified the format. This is not, however, a strictly business relationship -- so different social rules apply, much to my dismay. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] pgpJRC8WHvOU7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
message from Bill Tillman btillma...@yahoo.com Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2011 14:42:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Bill Tillman btillma...@yahoo.com To: FreeBSD freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD? ... Oh and just in case...I use Asterisk on FreeBSD-8.2-STABLE as my PBX for my private home office. I connect via SIP with a VOIP provider who provides not only phone service but a DID as well. I use SIP phones (actual phones, not software) to make my SOHO appear to be a professional corporate office with transfers, conference calls, Music on hold, voice mail, the works. I occassionally use an IAX softphone or SIP softphone program on Windows to make and receive calls but for the most part I use the actual phones. Several friends and family members have asked me to set them up similarly but unless I could make it totally handsfree for them there is no way it will ever work, simply because they are not hobbyists like me and have no desire to do anything but click a big button on their desktop which looks like a phone. Anything beyond that and you're into the realm of impossibleagain. Hello Bill, I've read this about Asterisk with special attention and interests. At the moment I have at home a 'normal' ISDN BRI telephone (two D-channels) and DSL for Internet. I'm thinking in replacing the ISDN telephone with some small FreeBSD box running Asterisk and allowing: - SIP clients (Ekiga) from my laptop and the laptop of my wife (both WLAN) to do normal calls via Asterisk (at the end through the ISDN line), or SIP calls when I'm traveling around with my laptop/netbook; - having 1-2 SIP phones connected via WLAN to the FreeBSD Asterisk as well to be always reachable (even if the laptops are down) Maybe you have some documentation to share (off-list) about your installation, or some hints about. Thanks in advance matthias -- Matthias Apitz t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211 e g...@unixarea.de - w http://www.unixarea.de/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 12:34:51 -0400, Jerry wrote: Would you care to elaborate on that statement? Is your prejudice based on the fact that there is nothing in the open-source community that can even begin to match the robustness and ease of use of MS Office, [...] Are you refering to the surprising fact of incobpatibilites between different versions, and betweeen same versions of different architectures (32/64 bit)? :-) As it has been mentioned, next year problems has never been a field where users could rely on MICROS~1 products. It's traditionally been the users of open source programs that had to do the magic to import + export defective Office files. And outside MICROS~1 land, their Office files are not very much appreciated. Unlike your appraisal of the situation, I find that users use office suites, in this case MS Office because it offers the end user what they want. I've already heared so many users complaining about the Ribbon UI and seen them transitioning their infrastructures to more old-fashioned interfaces like of OpenOffice. Users had a hard time learning menues (although they would never admit), and now something different? Something that requires you learning and recognizing pictures instead of words? Pictures that dynamically change location and size? Depending on window size and what the cursor is currently pointing on? No Sir, I don't like it. is a common statement. Specifically, an all-in-one application that integrates seamlessly into their home or work environment without the need of additional software. The egg-laying wool-milk sow, a one size fits all program, has proven in history that it's nothing more than a big pile of problems that claims to be able to do everything, but in the end, fails at simple things. Modularity is the key. Open standards are the future. History teaches exactly that. The fact that home consumers and corporate big-thinkers don't want to realize this doesn't make any difference. In the end, they will all pay, on one or another kind. Microsoft's decision to offer MS Office in several flavors was a wise investment. The MS Office Home and Student 2010 can be purchased for $79 from many distributors. I know over a dozen users who have installed this very suite on their home PCs simple because the price+value exceeds anything available anywhere else. You can legally download and install OpenOffice for $0.00 and even exchange files with older versions of that program, even with StarOffice. Can you do that with MS Office? Surely not. And your files are in a documented and standardized XML format. This means they can be opened in the future, unlike the strange and secret memory-dump formats (that sounds SO wrong) that older Office programs did use. Open software usually is of high value that is in NO relation to its price (for the end user, which is zero), simply because it has to be on par with the big ones, and in many cases, it is _better_ than the big ones, because its developers don't think in quarterly terms and in how much units they will sell. They don't have to. They have a better motivation. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 11:30:46 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: It's not prejudice. That assumes I prejudge. My judgment is based on years of fighting with the BS features of office suites of all descriptions for years, and loathing every minute of it. I don't care whether they're open source, closed source, or blue-green algae source. I think you're fully right, I also made comparable observations during many years. Allow me to point you to the following document: http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/wp.html As an old man, also allow me to point to history. In the past, german users did use text mode word processors in english language. They were able to learn how to use them, and they produced better- looking results with them (on the printers of that time!) than they do today with their wonderful programs. Why? Because they can't handle them. It's no use how much effort programmers and UI designers put into creating a text processing program. People are just too stupid to _properly_ use it. I'm sure you know that there are templates for designing text attributes, just as you use CSS to configure what certain HTML tagged text should look like. Users don't use them. They think: This is a headline. According to my counting, it is 3.1.2., and it should be *click* bold face and *click* *click* *click* 15 points, ah, and I want another *click-many-times* font for that. You can easily deduct what happens when the table of contents changes, or when the font size changes. Hell, I've even seen people doing two column documents with spaces. SPACEs!!! Office suites are basically just featuritis sores growing on the faces of our computer working environments. Feature creep has gotten so out of control in MS Office that the ribbon was invented to deal with the fact that it had far more features than the interface could reasonably manage. The ribbon is, in fact, basically a very clever, well-designed answer to a problem that should never have existed in the first place, and as such the ribbon ends up being little more than one more feature in something that has far too many features in the first place. About the Ribbon, read (and see) more here: http://toastytech.com/guis/win72.html It's page 2 of the Windows 7 GUI demonstration, lower part. People actually open MS Word or OO.o Writer to do nothing but make simple, unformatted notes to themselves. Have you people never heard of a damned text editor? No, because Word is everything that exists. This demonstrates the main reason of the presence of MICROS~1 products: Their education of users. It begins in school and continues in work environments. They put a lot of money into their advertising programs. Furthermore, today's users can't concentrate on what text _is_, they can just think in terms of what text _looks like_. The new standard HTML 5 will be a real pain for them. :-) For all the document merging and management features of these things, in the end one is usually better off not using any of them; just cut and paste instead. Cut and paste takes less than a minute, but I've seen expert MS Office users spend half an hour screwing around with document merging to do what could as easily have been done with a simple cut and paste. It can be even worse, when documents get faxed and retyped and corrected many times. Yes, that really happens, I frequently see this professional stuff in action. :-) For actual content merging, despite all the derogatory noises MS Office users will typically make about the evils of the command line and how difficult it is to use, what might take an hour in MS Office can often be accomplished in roughly equivalent fashion using simpler file formats and a couple of command line tools like grep and cat in under five minutes. Actual content? WHO creates actual content? Business? Haha! :-) Honestly: I've build a working environment in the past where multi-platform operations are essentially needed, for creation of technical documentation. I had my kids... erm user, users! :-) learning CVS and LaTeX, a bit of GNUplot, and one of them can also write scripts (shell, awk, sed, perl and so on). They now do fully function and produce high quality documents, used for web publication and printing. They were coming from a MICROS~1 environment, and they had never believed me that investing a little time into learning could make them that productive. Productivity. Do I need to say more? -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 11:22:48 -0400, Jerry wrote: Open or closed makes no relative difference to me or the majority of users as has been demonstrated numerous time with various software titles. The majority doesn't always have to be quantitative. (Rosa Luxemburg) Average home users avoid learning, reading, thinking. They take whatever comes with the PC. What comes with the PC is a deal between the manufacturer or reseller and MICROS~1. This is a win-win situation for both of them. The user will pay anyway. Sometimes, the user doesn't even pay for things he does _not_ use. An example I recently read is that MICROS~1 profits from any HTC Andoid phone sold, and they got more money from that deal than from selling their own phone stuff. http://www.businessinsider.com/htc-pays-microsoft-5-per-android-phone-2011-5 http://www.asymco.com/2011/05/27/microsoft-has-received-five-times-more-income-from-android-than-from-windows-phone/ You are free to see moral implications, but in the end, it shows again what kind of face this corporation as, although it's hidden behind a shiny package. Finally it's all about making money, the primary objective of a company. It's just by which means you get there. The bottom line is does it work and what is the learning curve of the product. I think you have a wrong interpretation of what learning means, especially in IT context, and in regards to end users. They do not learn - at least they claim not to. Their knowledge is of short life. What they learned once (e. g. for one version of Word) doesn't apply anywhere else (e. g. in the next version of Word). Constant relearning of arbitrary things is needed, and because it's not done, they are unable to properly use the products. This causes a loss in productivity, and on other fields of use, a rise of security problems. It has been demonstrated numerous times that the majority of end users do not want to invest large amounts of time trying to get an application configured and up and running. I fully agree with that. They do not want to even use a particular program. They want a RESULT, and they want it NOW. The computer with its programs is just a tool. Now you have to judge that tool. Is it a good one that helps you in productivity? Or is it a bad one that stands in your way, shoots your foot, or makes your data disappear? With the exception of the hobbyist, that is virtually always true. The term investing time contains investing. This means, you put something in, you do a struggle to achieve something, and after some time, it pays for you. Because people like car analogies, here's one: You have a bike, it's been cheap. But you need to transport fridges all day long. So you get a waggon, also for quite cheap. Works? Yes. But it's very hard. Now you invest (!) in buying a car, taking driving lessons, pass the driving test. It's quite expensive. And the monthly costs for the car. But in the end, you can transport more fridges, more easily. Your investition payed in the end. But you had to learn. Learn all the funny signs, bars and circles, and blinking lights, the strange rules, left and right, precedence, the knobs and displays, 1-2-3-4-5-R (or P-D-R), the pedals, the levers. Looking, pushing, pulling, turning, all at the same time. Quite complicated at the first time. But with experience, with learning by doing, you are a good car driver now. You haven't been in the past if you wouldn't have invested time and money. I am not sure about this ICQ rant. I think one main problem with ICQ is that among their terms of use, there was something like Everything you write on ICQ belongs to us, but I'm not fully sure. I never was much for IMs anyway. Well, me too. I've been using Jabber-based services in the past (free), but I think regular e-mail and chat (IRC) took over the IM functionality for me. In relation to average home users (and often also corporeate users), simple e-mail stuff is too complicated for them. They can't quite, can't answer. They print my message and phone me. They can't send attachments, they can't open them. A typical situation, at least in Germany. I have been in various environment and I been exposed to both Linux and Microsoft servers. I cannot say with any certainty that BSD servers were employed however. You don't see the good servers. They run the Internet. Because they run UNIX. :-) The quality of the server is usually, at least in my own experience, directly related to the personnel who are responsible for its configuration and maintenance. Veryy true, I also agree with this. Although there is a lot of potential in how a server OS is preconfigured (secure, insecure), those who operate it make the difference. You can easily conclude what happens if _nobody_ operates and maintains them: Trouble. Let me give you an example from reality: While being travelling, I had my WLAN check running in the hotel where I stayed. Nearby, a network of an
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 01:36:17PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 11:30:46 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: It's not prejudice. That assumes I prejudge. My judgment is based on years of fighting with the BS features of office suites of all descriptions for years, and loathing every minute of it. I don't care whether they're open source, closed source, or blue-green algae source. I think you're fully right, I also made comparable observations during many years. Allow me to point you to the following document: http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/wp.html I started reading it. I intend to finish reading it some time before lunch, though I have other things I need to do for a while first. What I have seen so far seems pretty accurate, though. You can easily deduct what happens when the table of contents changes, or when the font size changes. Hell, I've even seen people doing two column documents with spaces. SPACEs!!! For my purposes, that wouldn't be as bad as the converse, sometimes. I sent someone a set of two simple text files last week, each line a label and a value separated by : . I asked for the values to be edited to be correct for the recipient's circumstances (too much to go into to explain the particulars, so we'll keep it vague). The idea was that, once I got it back, I would use a simple script to pull the data from the file and insert it into a hierarchical database, where each file corresponded to a different subrecord. Yesterday (after sending my previous email to this thread), I got the result back. The data had been combined into one MS Word OOXML document (.docx). Well, that wouldn't be *too* bad, I suppose, because I could just save as plain text if it was in the same format, and use tail and head to break the data into two files again. Unfortunately, the mutilation of data was not so simple. It had been shoved into one page per text file's worth of data, arranged in four tables of one column each to present a four-column format on the page. I still managed to do everything I needed to do in under twenty minutes, but if the data had been left in the plain text, linewise format I had sent to this person, I would have been able to do it all in about *two* minutes, including the time spent writing the script to grab the data and shove it into my database. The thing that most bothered me about all this is the fact that it must have taken this person twenty minutes *at least* just to create that absurd table-columnar format in the first place, and that's assuming the person had some way to automatically place the data in these tables' cells, rather than having to cut and paste each datum individually. So, basically, people are so compromised, so brainwashed, so afflicted by office suite Stockholm Syndrome, that they will spend between twenty minutes and an hour formatting simple text data in a frankly hideous four column format when the end result is that I will have to spend another twenty minutes undoing all of that to insert the data into a database. Yes, this person knew I was going to use a script to put the data into a database and throw away the file. Somehow, though, it *never* occurs to such people to just leave well enough alone, save everyone some time, and do the minimum that needs to be done. This is what happens when an office suite expert gets his or her hands on a simple data format. If it was some amateur who created columns using spaces, it would have altered the data format I expected and required me to add an extra step to the script I used to bend the data back into a useful shape -- but it would not have appreciably increased the time needed. Things would have been *much* easier to deal with under those circumstances. . . . and, somehow, social convention tells me it would be rude to let this person know (for next time) that everything will be much easier for everyone if the data is just left in its original format. For all the document merging and management features of these things, in the end one is usually better off not using any of them; just cut and paste instead. Cut and paste takes less than a minute, but I've seen expert MS Office users spend half an hour screwing around with document merging to do what could as easily have been done with a simple cut and paste. It can be even worse, when documents get faxed and retyped and corrected many times. Yes, that really happens, I frequently see this professional stuff in action. Oh, it's even worse than that. My girlfriend had a co-worker not long ago who received a Microsoft Office document that the higher-ups wanted her to edit and enhance somewhat. She spent ten minutes trying to figure out why she was having such a hard time making the needed changes. My girlfriend (has a technical, rather than office administrative, job -- and is thus regarded as a computer expert and asked for help with such things) was asked for help.
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:46:24 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 01:36:17PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: You can easily deduct what happens when the table of contents changes, or when the font size changes. Hell, I've even seen people doing two column documents with spaces. SPACEs!!! For my purposes, that wouldn't be as bad as the converse, sometimes. I've seen that kind ofother typographic aspect, two column text already,results get really ugly. Just and whenever you have to imagine you would have to change page settings, font insert or delete some words. sizes, attributes or anyVery professional. :-) I sent someone a set of two simple text files last week, each line a label and a value separated by : . I asked for the values to be edited to be correct for the recipient's circumstances (too much to go into to explain the particulars, so we'll keep it vague). The idea was that, once I got it back, I would use a simple script to pull the data from the file and insert it into a hierarchical database, where each file corresponded to a different subrecord. This CSV approach is very handy for automated processing, I'm using it for various purposes (e. g. technical data gets calculated from CSV to tables and diagram data, rendered by gnuplot, and images, tables and values in text are automatically inserted into the main document; change values - recompile document - get new values in _all_ places where needed). Yesterday (after sending my previous email to this thread), I got the result back. The data had been combined into one MS Word OOXML document (.docx). Well, that wouldn't be *too* bad, I suppose, because I could just save as plain text if it was in the same format, and use tail and head to break the data into two files again. Unfortunately, the mutilation of data was not so simple. It had been shoved into one page per text file's worth of data, arranged in four tables of one column each to present a four-column format on the page. Cool, must be the same kind of person who, when asked to send a picture image file, puts it into Powerpoint, copies that presentation into a DOC file, imports that into an Excel table and finally compresses it with RAR, while renaming the file extension .PDF. :-) I still managed to do everything I needed to do in under twenty minutes, but if the data had been left in the plain text, linewise format I had sent to this person, I would have been able to do it all in about *two* minutes, including the time spent writing the script to grab the data and shove it into my database. Text, pure ASCII text, is _the_ standard format for data interchange (and I'm not paying attention to EBCDIC on IBM here). People start realizing this when they can't open their documents anymore. That's why I like LaTeX for example. It's pure text. There is a difference between the document one is working on (semantic document), and the result (typographic document). But understanding that difference and its many advantages requires some brain power. :-) The thing that most bothered me about all this is the fact that it must have taken this person twenty minutes *at least* just to create that absurd table-columnar format in the first place, and that's assuming the person had some way to automatically place the data in these tables' cells, rather than having to cut and paste each datum individually. In a funny way, people seem to have time for this. An example I've seen is a programmer who's job it is to take the data files output by a mainframe system (plain text with numbers and text, usually column-oriented) and manually (!) put it into Excel tables, arrange them, and prepare for printing. It would of course be much easier to write an output processor for the mainframe to deliver LaTeX or even OpenOffice XML files, and she as a programmer would much prefer to do this, but no, the big boss wants it that way. (Note: She is a professional mainframe PROGRAMMER who spends her time manually arranging data - this must be very disappointing.) So, basically, people are so compromised, so brainwashed, so afflicted by office suite Stockholm Syndrome, that they will spend between twenty minutes and an hour formatting simple text data in a frankly hideous four column format when the end result is that I will have to spend another twenty minutes undoing all of that to insert the data into a database. They also do this with Excel tables they use as a worse phonebook. Keep in mind that even with their plentycore processor tenmelonhundred GHz systems, they treat their PCs as worse typewriters, creating the ugliest results, assuming this is the only thing that exists. Yes, this person knew I was going to use a script to put the data into a database and throw away the file. Somehow, though, it *never* occurs to such people to just leave well enough alone, save everyone some time, and do
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
This email actually mentions Skype and SIP phones toward the end. On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 06:29:03PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:46:24 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: I still managed to do everything I needed to do in under twenty minutes, but if the data had been left in the plain text, linewise format I had sent to this person, I would have been able to do it all in about *two* minutes, including the time spent writing the script to grab the data and shove it into my database. Text, pure ASCII text, is _the_ standard format for data interchange (and I'm not paying attention to EBCDIC on IBM here). People start realizing this when they can't open their documents anymore. That's why I like LaTeX for example. It's pure text. There is a difference between the document one is working on (semantic document), and the result (typographic document). But understanding that difference and its many advantages requires some brain power. :-) In general, the simplest possible format to achieve what is actually needed is the best option. This means that even LaTeX is usually the wrong choice. The thing that most bothered me about all this is the fact that it must have taken this person twenty minutes *at least* just to create that absurd table-columnar format in the first place, and that's assuming the person had some way to automatically place the data in these tables' cells, rather than having to cut and paste each datum individually. In a funny way, people seem to have time for this. An example I've seen is a programmer who's job it is to take the data files output by a mainframe system (plain text with numbers and text, usually column-oriented) and manually (!) put it into Excel tables, arrange them, and prepare for printing. It would of course be much easier to write an output processor for the mainframe to deliver LaTeX or even OpenOffice XML files, and she as a programmer would much prefer to do this, but no, the big boss wants it that way. (Note: She is a professional mainframe PROGRAMMER who spends her time manually arranging data - this must be very disappointing.) Does this programmer get to write a simple script to translate to CSV, then import CSV into Excel, when the boss turns his/her back? So, basically, people are so compromised, so brainwashed, so afflicted by office suite Stockholm Syndrome, that they will spend between twenty minutes and an hour formatting simple text data in a frankly hideous four column format when the end result is that I will have to spend another twenty minutes undoing all of that to insert the data into a database. They also do this with Excel tables they use as a worse phonebook. An Excel spreadsheet probably would have been easier to use, because of the ability to export as CSV. It doesn't occur to them that there are things other people can do with computers that they can't, as they understand theirselves often as IT professionals, where professional means that they - on their own! - can switch the PC on on their own and use the mouse. In this case, it was an HR professional (though what we were doing was well outside of that working environment). The task leave it in the original format would be too complicated to explain, I think. I think the approach I need to take next time is to create a Web form that takes inputs for the values and does not allow the user to touch the key names. When the form is submitted, it creates a plain text file for me, or just adds it to the database automatically. Placing it in a browser would make things marginally more effort-intensive for the end user than editing a text file directly, but much *much* less effort-intensive than creating that four-column format. With luck, it would never occur to the end-user to copy and paste from the Webpage into a Microsoft Word document and send that to me. Let me tell you that it can be worse, I've seen that _once_: The professional user imported the scanned document into an image processing software, and used _that_ to change some text. If the person in my case had decided to make changes in some image editing software, that at least would have been effective (for some definition of effective). Importing it into a Microsoft Word document, however, resulted in nothing getting done until someone else came along and asked Where's the original document? Consider the stories of major corporations literally banning use of PowerPoint and seeing a significant productivity boost. I've not heared about that, but I think it was a good step. It has been a couple years since I started hearing about this stuff. I think the big names doing that kind of thing included Sun. After a couple months, of course, this kind of thing stops being news, so I have no idea who may still be doing stuff like this -- because nobody would report it any longer. As for making telephone calls with the help
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:04:28 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: This email actually mentions Skype and SIP phones toward the end. Much appreviated. :-) In general, the simplest possible format to achieve what is actually needed is the best option. True. This means that even LaTeX is usually the wrong choice. LaTeX is for typesetting text (articles, books, technical documents, maybe even letters) - nothing more, nothing less. I would _not_ claim that it is optimal for log files. :-) Does this programmer get to write a simple script to translate to CSV, then import CSV into Excel, when the boss turns his/her back? It's not allowed, and on the Windows platform (that the scrapped PCs run via network), there are no scripting means. Furthermore, those workstations are monitored (due to security considerations), surely just sampled, not permanently. The easiest way would be the required output writer on the mainframe that could output OpenOffice XML, and that could then be even exported into some outdated Excel format, if urgently needed. An Excel spreadsheet probably would have been easier to use, because of the ability to export as CSV. No. Excel is to make rows and columns where you enter the values you've just read from your desk calculator. :-) In this case, it was an HR professional (though what we were doing was well outside of that working environment). Then HR _requires_ the use of a PC (as a tool), those who use it should be _able_ to use it. In reality, it is hardly the case. I think the approach I need to take next time is to create a Web form that takes inputs for the values and does not allow the user to touch the key names. That's good. People like the web. Make sure the web page has some images, so it is entertaining, and maybe plays some music so the users feel comfortable. :-) When the form is submitted, it creates a plain text file for me, or just adds it to the database automatically. Placing it in a browser would make things marginally more effort-intensive for the end user than editing a text file directly, but much *much* less effort-intensive than creating that four-column format. For some settings, I really _dislike_ the use of a web browser as any interaction is limited to what the browser can actually do. One example is how the keyboard can be used. Real professionals prefer it over mouse interaction (as this means a break in the natural work flow). Security considerations may also be included when thinking about migrating some functionality into a web browser. You could make an icon for the Windows desktop that opens a SSH session (e. g. using PuTTY) where users can enter the data into a simple dialog program (e. g. using NCurses Forms), and this program outputs a CSV data file which then gets incorporated into the database. Just an idea. With luck, it would never occur to the end-user to copy and paste from the Webpage into a Microsoft Word document and send that to me. Just expect they send you a HTML export file they made with this Powerpoint. :-) If the person in my case had decided to make changes in some image editing software, that at least would have been effective (for some definition of effective). Importing it into a Microsoft Word document, however, resulted in nothing getting done until someone else came along and asked Where's the original document? It's hard even to understand what original document means. I had a customer (real story again) who wanted to send me a fax, but then phoned me to tell me that he can't, as the page always comes out of the fax machine. Meanwhile, I had more than 20 faxes on my system, all the same page. I needed to ask him: Do you assume that faxing works like a tube in a pneumatic delivery system? :-) As for making telephone calls with the help of a computer . . . I do not have high hopes for Skype in the future. As I think I mentioned in an earlier email, I expect Microsoft to extend Skype in ways intended to break compatibility with non-Microsoft platforms. And in the next step, the use of this functionality, integrated into Windows, will be a pay-per-use service. I also expect that, if Microsoft really support Skype rather than just letting it die, it will get some MS Office integration features added to it that will make it the voice chat equivalent of exactly the sort of stupidity we have been discussing. Will be funny to see a worker working when we open an Office document. :-) An open source equivalent that could be run just as easily from the command line as from a GUI and is not dependent upon any specific OS platform's facilities in particular would be great. General use would be possible, just Skype users would be on a dead end soon, left alone in a proprietary network where they can't reach anyone else. SIP phones and Asterisk PBXes are great for what they are, but they do not really address the needs of casual voice chatters who want
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 07:44:04PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:04:28 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: This means that even LaTeX is usually the wrong choice. LaTeX is for typesetting text (articles, books, technical documents, maybe even letters) - nothing more, nothing less. I would _not_ claim that it is optimal for log files. :-) I actually use Markdown for articles I write for TechRepublic (and a filter utility I wrote that translates that to HTML), because LaTeX would be an egregious case of massive overkill for that purpose. Even for purposes such as document formatting, it is serious overkill -- including for many cases where one plans to print it out. Yes, it's The Tool for typesetting, but don't mistake typesetting as what you do when you just want to print out a document. Resume? Sure. Inter-office memo? Hell no. Does this programmer get to write a simple script to translate to CSV, then import CSV into Excel, when the boss turns his/her back? It's not allowed, and on the Windows platform (that the scrapped PCs run via network), there are no scripting means. Furthermore, those workstations are monitored (due to security considerations), surely just sampled, not permanently. The easiest way would be the required output writer on the mainframe that could output OpenOffice XML, and that could then be even exported into some outdated Excel format, if urgently needed. I can't imagine the rationale offered for doing this crap by hand, unless they're trying to serve some kind of budgetary constraint where a certain number of man hours must be spent on a task to justify current budget levels. An Excel spreadsheet probably would have been easier to use, because of the ability to export as CSV. No. Excel is to make rows and columns where you enter the values you've just read from your desk calculator. I meant that an Excel spreadsheet would have been easier for *me* to use in the case of needing to insert data into my hierarchical database, because exporting the spreadsheet document as CSV would have been less troublesome for munging the data afterward than exporting a Word document as plain text. When the form is submitted, it creates a plain text file for me, or just adds it to the database automatically. Placing it in a browser would make things marginally more effort-intensive for the end user than editing a text file directly, but much *much* less effort-intensive than creating that four-column format. For some settings, I really _dislike_ the use of a web browser as any interaction is limited to what the browser can actually do. One example is how the keyboard can be used. Real professionals prefer it over mouse interaction (as this means a break in the natural work flow). Oh, for competent users I will make sure to make a plain text file available, of course. This is not a public Webpage I'm contemplating; it's just a way to keep some of the people to whom I would otherwise give a text file from making their lives and my life (both) monumentally more difficult while worshipping Office-suite-hotep. Security considerations may also be included when thinking about migrating some functionality into a web browser. Web form access will be strictly limited. You could make an icon for the Windows desktop that opens a SSH session (e. g. using PuTTY) where users can enter the data into a simple dialog program (e. g. using NCurses Forms), and this program outputs a CSV data file which then gets incorporated into the database. Just an idea. Nah. They'd rebel. This is too hard. It doesn't have any buttons. I do not have high hopes for Skype in the future. As I think I mentioned in an earlier email, I expect Microsoft to extend Skype in ways intended to break compatibility with non-Microsoft platforms. And in the next step, the use of this functionality, integrated into Windows, will be a pay-per-use service. I don't know about that. It doesn't really fit the pattern. For the most part, software included with MS Windows serves one of two purposes only: 1. lock people into MS Windows 2. induce people to buy MS Office I don't see how a pay-per-use Skype service would accomplish that. I also expect that, if Microsoft really support Skype rather than just letting it die, it will get some MS Office integration features added to it that will make it the voice chat equivalent of exactly the sort of stupidity we have been discussing. Will be funny to see a worker working when we open an Office document. Yeah, the privacy issues inherent in such a situation on MS Windows are both hilarious and depressing to contemplate. Portability is essentially the last thing on the minds of most Linux community developers lately, from what I've seen. Yes, LATELY... Not just lately -- *increasingly*. The problem has been getting steadily worse for several years. For
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
El día Saturday, June 18, 2011 a las 10:24:21PM -0700, Yuri escribió: On 06/18/2011 22:10, Matthias Apitz wrote: Try this for building ekiga from SVN/git: http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/Compile_your_own_SVN_version_of_Ekiga_on_FreeBSD It does use GTK and works in FreeBSD. This HOWTO is truly amazing. Why don't they just fix the FreeBSD port instead of writing whole HOWTO? Note, I have not said that the port is not working, I have not tried the ports of ekiga/ptlib/opal for a long time. Ports are based on released versions/snapshots and when I started in 2008 with Ekiga because I wanted to have something working together with our Polycon video conference system, it just did not worked (for example the device detection of the video cam in PTlib was Linux 'oriented'). That's why I started from SVN and provided as well fixes upstream for ekiga. We should get rid of Skype and use something Open Source for IM (like Pidgin and Ekiga). matthias -- Matthias Apitz t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211 e g...@unixarea.de - w http://www.unixarea.de/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 22:23:15 +0100 Frank Shute fr...@shute.org.uk articulated: I think we have to wait for somebody to write a Skype clone and hopefully MS taking over Skype will provide the impetus (MS will drop the linux port as soon as they can). Yes, more FUD. No one, including the OP has ever produced a single shred of proof that Microsoft would discontinue support for operating systems other than its own. While it certainly has every legal right to do so, it would be counter productive to seriously entertain that notion. While they would most likely would not produce any binaries specific to FreeBSD, but then again, no one else ever did either, supplying binaries for Linux would certainly be advantageous. The frame work is all ready in place and there does not appear to be any movement or reason to disassemble it A simple check on the business model of Skype in Microsoft's software arsenal would lead one to the conclusion that continuing Skype support/development on non-Windows operating systems was advantageous. No one has come forth with a suitable thesis to dispute those facts although the usual sky is falling from the usual naysayers is still prevalent. -- Jerry ✌ jerry+f...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or ignored. Do not CC this poster. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Auto Reply: Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
I am out of the office until June 20th. I will only have intermittent access to email. I will read and reply to your message when I get back to the office. If you need assistance with a Berkeley DB or Product Management issue while I am away, please contact ashok.jo...@oracle.com. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Auto Reply: Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 04:27:04 -0700 (PDT) Dave Segleau dave.segl...@oracle.com articulated: I am out of the office until June 20th. I will only have intermittent access to email. I will read and reply to your message when I get back to the office. If you need assistance with a Berkeley DB or Product Management issue while I am away, please contact ashok.jo...@oracle.com. Yes, another malfunctioning / incorrectly configured vacation / auto reply program. I often wonder if anyone actually takes the few minutes required to check to make sure the program is working correctly. -- Jerry ✌ jerry+f...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or ignored. Do not CC this poster. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Auto Reply: Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
Jerry wrote: On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 04:27:04 -0700 (PDT) Dave Segleau dave.segl...@oracle.com articulated: I am out of the office until June 20th. I will only have intermittent access to email. I will read and reply to your message when I get back to the office. If you need assistance with a Berkeley DB or Product Management issue while I am away, please contact ashok.jo...@oracle.com. Yes, another malfunctioning / incorrectly configured vacation / auto reply program. I often wonder if anyone actually takes the few minutes required to check to make sure the program is working correctly. The extremely busy lifestyle of the multi-tasking office worker is such that they have no time or attention span for actually paying much attention to anything. They will always have 50 million things going on at once, and as they time- slice through their day, priorities shift in real-time necessitating the need to interrupt task A because another multi-tasker has deemed task B now more important. With ever increasing input from larger pools of colleagues the rate of interrupt accelerates, creating the guarantee no task will ever be completed. So, myriad sub-tasks are never operated on long enough and with sufficient attention to bring about a quality completion. But the multi-tasking office worker can now proclaim: I did 50 million things today and I was so good at it I need a vacation and a salary increase. And: I'm so important I absolutely must let everyone know. /tongue-in-cheek :-) -Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
The fact Microsoft did buy Skype, does worry me too. The Skype protocol is a closed protocol. SIP is an open standard. And about Microsoft ? Almost EVERYTHING in hands of Microsoft turns to a disaster or something which does compromise security, privacy or whatever. They can't make a secured OS, their servers are nothing compared to BSD servers, their hypervisors are sh.t as their messenger took ICQ from the market. And the last one did piss me off, because in the old days, I got nice dates with academic people with ICQ. But Messenger killed this all. My opinion, when I can get away from Microsoft, I do it. This company is a complete failure, and I don't belief they will persist to even exist in a decade due to their policies. With Microsoft there is ALWAYS a catch. Jurgen 2011/6/19 Jerry je...@seibercom.net On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 22:23:15 +0100 Frank Shute fr...@shute.org.uk articulated: I think we have to wait for somebody to write a Skype clone and hopefully MS taking over Skype will provide the impetus (MS will drop the linux port as soon as they can). Yes, more FUD. No one, including the OP has ever produced a single shred of proof that Microsoft would discontinue support for operating systems other than its own. While it certainly has every legal right to do so, it would be counter productive to seriously entertain that notion. While they would most likely would not produce any binaries specific to FreeBSD, but then again, no one else ever did either, supplying binaries for Linux would certainly be advantageous. The frame work is all ready in place and there does not appear to be any movement or reason to disassemble it A simple check on the business model of Skype in Microsoft's software arsenal would lead one to the conclusion that continuing Skype support/development on non-Windows operating systems was advantageous. No one has come forth with a suitable thesis to dispute those facts although the usual sky is falling from the usual naysayers is still prevalent. -- Jerry ✌ jerry+f...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or ignored. Do not CC this poster. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
... I hate to say this but they made Bungie into something really good. But I miss Marathon. On Jun 19, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Jurgen Debo wrote: And about Microsoft ? Almost EVERYTHING in hands of Microsoft turns to a disaster or something which does compromise security, privacy or whatever. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
From http://www.jitsi.org/ (formerly SIP Communicator) All this, and more, in Jitsi - the most complete and advanced open source ... With a little bit of extra bravery you can also easily build and run it on FreeBSD. and [all] you need is a recent JDK and ANT. Good luck with that. Mark ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 15:50:44 +0200 Jurgen Debo articulated: The fact Microsoft did buy Skype, does worry me too. The Skype protocol is a closed protocol. SIP is an open standard. Open or closed makes no relative difference to me or the majority of users as has been demonstrated numerous time with various software titles. The bottom line is does it work and what is the learning curve of the product. It has been demonstrated numerous times that the majority of end users do not want to invest large amounts of time trying to get an application configured and up and running. With the exception of the hobbyist, that is virtually always true. And about Microsoft ? Almost EVERYTHING in hands of Microsoft turns to a disaster or something which does compromise security, privacy or whatever. They can't make a secured OS, their servers are nothing compared to BSD servers, their hypervisors are sh.t as their messenger took ICQ from the market. And the last one did piss me off, because in the old days, I got nice dates with academic people with ICQ. But Messenger killed this all. I am not sure about this ICQ rant. I never was much for IMs anyway. My favorite was Trillian though. I have not used it in several years though. I am still not sure about your rant regarding messenger vs ICQ. ICQ is certainly still in use; I just checked. I have been in various environment and I been exposed to both Linux and Microsoft servers. I cannot say with any certainty that BSD servers were employed however. In any case, I have never personally experienced any appreciable difference. That, of course, is my own personal observation. The quality of the server is usually, at least in my own experience, directly related to the personnel who are responsible for its configuration and maintenance. My opinion, when I can get away from Microsoft, I do it. This company is a complete failure, and I don't belief they will persist to even exist in a decade due to their policies. Please define failure. When you control virtually 90% of the PC market, I fail to see how you can call that a failure. They released Kinect in advance of *.nix forcing others to play catch-up. To control any theater of operations you must get ahead of the curve. While hobbyists love anything not Microsoft, in the medical profession, legal profession, etcetera, Microsoft rules. There are highly specialized software written for their operating system that simply does not exist anywhere else. When it comes to Office Suites, there is nothing even remotely close to what Office 10 offers, no matter what flavor you prefer. OO tried for over ten years and never even produced an Office-97 clone that was anywhere as fully functional as the prototype. I have seen grown men and women reduced to tears trying to get OO to accomplish what MS Office could easily do. Again, this is not a criticism but a simple statement of fact. Before anyone can seriously make an attempt to dethrone Microsoft, they have to produce an Office Suite that is as fully functional as and compatible with existing MS Office products. That is just not going to happen in the foreseeable future. I think this tidbit is rather interesting: The German Foreign Office first started using Linux as a server platform in 2001 before making Linux and open source software their default desktop choice in 2005. Most observers thought the move a success. However, the government will now transition back to Windows XP, to be followed by Windows 7, also dropping OpenOffice and Thunderbird in favor of MS Office and Outlook. Until open-source proponents stop blaming Microsoft for their problems and rather focus on making better and easier to use applications the demise of Microsoft is certainly not in sight. Alas, it is easier to blame than to correct so I do not see the status quo ante changing anytime soon. With Microsoft there is ALWAYS a catch. The same can be said of any OS. For instance, with FreeBSD one catch is that there are virtually no drivers for N class wireless devices even though said devices have been available for over 5 years. That is not a knock but rather a fact. There is ALWAYS a catch no matter what OS you are referring to. -- Jerry ✌ jerry+f...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or ignored. Do not CC this poster. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 09:49:49 -0600 Chad Perrin articulated: I eagerly await the day when office suites go the way of the dodo. I think people use them more due to a form of Stockholm Syndrome than out of any specific need, in most cases. Would you care to elaborate on that statement? Is your prejudice based on the fact that there is nothing in the open-source community that can even begin to match the robustness and ease of use of MS Office, and so as to simplify this question, I am referring to the latest offering; ie MS Office 10, or do you have some other specific complaint? Unlike your appraisal of the situation, I find that users use office suites, in this case MS Office because it offers the end user what they want. Specifically, an all-in-one application that integrates seamlessly into their home or work environment without the need of additional software. Microsoft's decision to offer MS Office in several flavors was a wise investment. The MS Office Home and Student 2010 can be purchased for $79 from many distributors. I know over a dozen users who have installed this very suite on their home PCs simple because the price+value exceeds anything available anywhere else. -- Jerry ✌ jerry+f...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or ignored. Do not CC this poster. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:22:48AM -0400, Jerry wrote: On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 15:50:44 +0200 Jurgen Debo articulated: The fact Microsoft did buy Skype, does worry me too. The Skype protocol is a closed protocol. SIP is an open standard. Open or closed makes no relative difference to me or the majority of users as has been demonstrated numerous time with various software titles. The bottom line is does it work and what is the learning curve of the product. It has been demonstrated numerous times that the majority of end users do not want to invest large amounts of time trying to get an application configured and up and running. With the exception of the hobbyist, that is virtually always true. You've missed the point here, I think. If it's a closed protocol, there will be hurdles to getting everything working smoothly on many open source operating systems. In particular, Microsoft buying Skype may actually mean the end of the Skype client that works on FreeBSD at some point in the future. Thus, activity in the commercial world endangers availability of a given means of communication on systems like FreeBSD when using something like Skype -- which uses a closed protocol. Open protocols, on the other hand, can be reimplemented as much as we like in multiple clients, some of which may be open source and pretty much guaranteed to work on FreeBSD as long as enough people care. It doesn't matter how many people care about whether Skype works, if the right people (at Microsoft, now that the company has purchased Skype) don't want to make it available. In short, while the majority of users as you put it might not care about open or closed when choosing Skype or SIP, that's because you only care about *right now*. Some of us care about the longer term, like Will this still work *tomorrow*? And about Microsoft ? Almost EVERYTHING in hands of Microsoft turns to a disaster or something which does compromise security, privacy or whatever. They can't make a secured OS, their servers are nothing compared to BSD servers, their hypervisors are sh.t as their messenger took ICQ from the market. And the last one did piss me off, because in the old days, I got nice dates with academic people with ICQ. But Messenger killed this all. I am not sure about this ICQ rant. I never was much for IMs anyway. My favorite was Trillian though. I have not used it in several years though. I am still not sure about your rant regarding messenger vs ICQ. ICQ is certainly still in use; I just checked. Trillian is a client. ICQ was at one time a client, but it was also a protocol and a network, and multiple clients (including Trillian) supported it. Pidgin, CenterIM, and Bitlbee are all clients that support ICQ, still. Trillian is *not* a protocol, and never was. The ICQ protocol and the AIM protocol have been merged into one protocol since AOL acquired ICQ, but the ICQ network of contacts still exists. Unfortunately, its popularity has waned due in part to the preinstalled availability of MSN Messenger, which I think is what irks Jurgen about MSN Messenger here. I have been in various environment and I been exposed to both Linux and Microsoft servers. I cannot say with any certainty that BSD servers were employed however. In any case, I have never personally experienced any appreciable difference. That, of course, is my own personal observation. The quality of the server is usually, at least in my own experience, directly related to the personnel who are responsible for its configuration and maintenance. I have had to support servers running MS Windows, Linux-based systems, and BSD Unix systems (primarily FreeBSD) over the years, sometimes in mixed environments. While your mileage may vary, my experience is: * On a network that was about 15% MS Windows systems (one server, bunches of desktops and laptops) and about 85% Linux-based systems (a handful of servers, and bunches of desktops and laptops -- several times more laptops than MS Windows laptops), 65% of my time as the sys/net admin for the company involved maintaining the MS Windows systems, which required a heck of a lot more overhead. The one MS Windows server in particular required more maintenance time than all the Linux-based servers put together, and that server required almost as much time dealing with its issues as all the Linux-based systems on the network as a whole. Even worse, of all the time I spent on MS Windows systems, almost all of it was spent fighting fires, while almost all the time I spent on the Linux-based systems was adding functionality to Linux-based systems that the engineers decided they wanted to help with their work. In short, for the Linux-based systems, I mostly spent my time adding value; for the MS Windows systems, I mostly spent my time trying to make sure they didn't fall apart. * Over the years, in dealing with networks running Linux-based systems,
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
Hello Jerry 2011/6/19 Jerry je...@seibercom.net On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 15:50:44 +0200 Jurgen Debo articulated: The fact Microsoft did buy Skype, does worry me too. The Skype protocol is a closed protocol. SIP is an open standard. Open or closed makes no relative difference to me or the majority of users as has been demonstrated numerous time with various software titles. The bottom line is does it work and what is the learning curve of the product. It has been demonstrated numerous times that the majority of end users do not want to invest large amounts of time trying to get an application configured and up and running. With the exception of the hobbyist, that is virtually always true. Open source software is not related to the comfort to configure or install software. It depends how the software is written. And about Microsoft ? Almost EVERYTHING in hands of Microsoft turns to a disaster or something which does compromise security, privacy or whatever. They can't make a secured OS, their servers are nothing compared to BSD servers, their hypervisors are sh.t as their messenger took ICQ from the market. And the last one did piss me off, because in the old days, I got nice dates with academic people with ICQ. But Messenger killed this all. I am not sure about this ICQ rant. I never was much for IMs anyway. My favorite was Trillian though. Trillian is not a messenger service. It is software to run different accounts on messenger services. Same can be done with opensource Jitsi. As Trillion does not support SIP. I have not used it in several years though. I am still not sure about your rant regarding messenger vs ICQ. ICQ is certainly still in use; I just checked. It is, but most users did quit. Because the common user is lazy and does use the Microsoft Messenger. In this messenger there is no search function etc. I have been in various environment and I been exposed to both Linux and Microsoft servers. I cannot say with any certainty that BSD servers were employed however. In any case, I have never personally experienced any appreciable difference. That, of course, is my own personal observation. The quality of the server is usually, at least in my own experience, directly related to the personnel who are responsible for its configuration and maintenance. If You want to be hacked in no time, trust me, do run Microsoft servers. And if You are not hacked, it is, You did have luck or You are not running important websites. My opinion, when I can get away from Microsoft, I do it. This company is a complete failure, and I don't belief they will persist to even exist in a decade due to their policies. Please define failure. When you control virtually 90% of the PC market, I fail to see how you can call that a failure. They released Kinect in advance of *.nix forcing others to play catch-up. To control any theater of operations you must get ahead of the curve. The PC market is NOT the server market. When people do buy a PC they got Microsoft software for free. As related to the security of the OS, you need to study the articles on the internet. I have no time to explain the difference between Unix and Microsoft OS. You can read this on the internet. While hobbyists love anything not Microsoft, in the medical profession, legal profession, etcetera, Microsoft rules. There are highly specialized software written for their operating system that simply does not exist anywhere else. When it comes to Office Suites, there is nothing even remotely close to what Office 10 offers, no matter what flavor you prefer. OO tried for over ten years and never even produced an Office-97 clone that was anywhere as fully functional as the prototype. I have seen grown men and women reduced to tears trying to get OO to accomplish what MS Office could easily do. Again, this is not a criticism but a simple statement of fact. Before anyone can seriously make an attempt to dethrone Microsoft, they have to produce an Office Suite that is as fully functional as and compatible with existing MS Office products. That is just not going to happen in the foreseeable future. To run programs, it is just fun. But if You would trace all outgoing connections from Your workstations to the internet, if You have no concerns about security, privacy and so on, then I can understand Your vision. I think this tidbit is rather interesting: The German Foreign Office first started using Linux as a server platform in 2001 before making Linux and open source software their default desktop choice in 2005. Most observers thought the move a success. However, the government will now transition back to Windows XP, to be followed by Windows 7, also dropping OpenOffice and Thunderbird in favor of MS Office and Outlook. And Russia did recommend recently their citizens to switch to Linux. Btw from decades, the best hackers were Russians. If you want Your
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
Wow. this thread really took a turn for the worse. So getting back to the main topic about SIP phones, I have been using SIP phones since 2006 and I never found anything that worked under FreeBSD. Mainly for this reason and this reason seems to mirror where this thread went off topic. While I could make something work on my end, because I'm a hobbyist, I could not get my friends, family, co-workers, customers, etc... to make anything work, even in the M$ environment. The main reason is that hackers in this world have caused all of us to in one way or another deploy firewalls. And I would say that 99% of the non-hobbyists out there don't have a clue how to configure their firewall, indeed many of them don't even know they have one working. Whether it's M$ built-in firewall or the firewall on their ISP supplied router/modem, or the hotel they are staying at is blocking SIP ports. Unless you can get the person on the other end to receive your phone call then very little works. Which is a real shame because as a hobbyist I have done some really neat things with SIP phones, Asterisk, not to mention VPN and other packages. But without another hobbyist on the other end, its proved more than impossible to get things working which I could really use on a daily basis. Oh and just in case...I use Asterisk on FreeBSD-8.2-STABLE as my PBX for my private home office. I connect via SIP with a VOIP provider who provides not only phone service but a DID as well. I use SIP phones (actual phones, not software) to make my SOHO appear to be a professional corporate office with transfers, conference calls, Music on hold, voice mail, the works. I occassionally use an IAX softphone or SIP softphone program on Windows to make and receive calls but for the most part I use the actual phones. Several friends and family members have asked me to set them up similarly but unless I could make it totally handsfree for them there is no way it will ever work, simply because they are not hobbyists like me and have no desire to do anything but click a big button on their desktop which looks like a phone. Anything beyond that and you're into the realm of impossibleagain. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On 06/18/2011 10:19, Yuri wrote: I tried ekiga but it doesn't work. It gets into standby mode and stays this way. I think it's because of firewall. There is the PR for this. I looked into Empathy. On Linux telepathy-sofiasip should be installed to add SIP to empathy, and on FreeBSD there is no such port. As a follow-up to my own question, I added two new ports (net-im/sofia-sip and net-im/telepathy-sofiasip) that should add SIP functionality to empathy IM client: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=158061 For some unknown reason empathy malfunctions when SIP protocol is selected. Maybe it's because current version in ports is outdated or maybe it's something with my station. I am investigating this. Yuri ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
В Sat, 18 Jun 2011 10:19:33 -0700 Yuri y...@rawbw.com пишет: I tried ekiga but it doesn't work. It gets into standby mode and stays this way. I think it's because of firewall. There is the PR for this. I looked into Empathy. On Linux telepathy-sofiasip should be installed to add SIP to empathy, and on FreeBSD there is no such port. Yuri I also can not get ekiga to work even after trying to configure a firewall and router, guided by the following instructions: http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/Internet_ports_used_by_Ekiga http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/Enable_port_forwarding_manually http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/Ekiga_behind_a_NAT_router :( ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On 06/18/2011 10:32, Ivan Klymenko wrote: I also can not get ekiga to work even after trying to configure a firewall and router, guided by the following instructions: http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/Internet_ports_used_by_Ekiga http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/Enable_port_forwarding_manually http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/Ekiga_behind_a_NAT_router :( I don't think you should need to configure router if it works. It should be able to find ports by itself like skype does it. If IM app can't find the way around the closed ports it isn't viable. Yuri ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 10:19:33AM -0700, Yuri wrote: I tried ekiga but it doesn't work. It gets into standby mode and stays this way. I think it's because of firewall. There is the PR for this. I looked into Empathy. On Linux telepathy-sofiasip should be installed to add SIP to empathy, and on FreeBSD there is no such port. Yuri Skype works. You need a reasonably recent 7 or 8 STABLE or CURRENT and the linux-f10 stuff. There are a number of skype ports; you want to use net-im/skype. Regards, -- Frank Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html pgpcx0DOWw6fU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On 06/18/2011 11:03, Frank Shute wrote: Skype works. You need a reasonably recent 7 or 8 STABLE or CURRENT and the linux-f10 stuff. There are a number of skype ports; you want to use net-im/skype. I use skype and trying to get rid of it. For security reasons. Also for the reason that MS who owns it now has the policy of cooperation with governments worldwide and there are many fascist governments out there. So my question was about the alternative to skype. Yuri ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Yuri y...@rawbw.com wrote: I tried ekiga but it doesn't work. It gets into standby mode and stays this way. I think it's because of firewall. There is the PR for this. Just to rule out the obvious, are you sure you've configured the *audio* ports and the mixer correctly? -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 02:33:06PM -0700, Yuri wrote: On 06/18/2011 14:23, Frank Shute wrote: I was going to use Ekiga but it's dependency on qt and my small SSD meant it was a no go. As another poster mentioned, I wasn't overly impressed that you have to muck about with your router etc. Actually, ekiga is GTK app and isn't supposed to use any Qt. That's what I thought before I started building it but it dragged in all the qt stuff for some reason! I was a bit disgusted at the time as it had been advertised as a Gnome app. I've just tried rebuilding it but it bombs out in net/opal with C++ compiler errors. No signs of the KDE menu I was presented with when I last built it. Maybe I built the wrong port first time around by mistake... Regards, -- Frank Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html pgp4KUG0e1DYB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 22:23:15 +0100, Frank Shute wrote: I think we have to wait for somebody to write a Skype clone and hopefully MS taking over Skype will provide the impetus (MS will drop the linux port as soon as they can). Some time ago I've read (at least I _think_ I read it) that someone reverse-engineered the Skype protocol, so there maybe is the chance that a free Skype alternative, being compatible with Skype, will be created. Anyway, getting rid of Skype is in my opinion mandatory to maintain freedom in _many_ ways, as it is obvious that MICROS~1 will be integrating its functionality into upcoming Windows and then surely will exclude anyone _else_ from participating. They have a long tradition doing such things... However, being able to use a cross-platform SIP capable client for IP telephony and video conferencing that is compatible with the majority of systems out there would be great, on _any_ free operating system (not just Linux). -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote: On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 22:23:15 +0100, Frank Shute wrote: I think we have to wait for somebody to write a Skype clone and hopefully MS taking over Skype will provide the impetus (MS will drop the linux port as soon as they can). Some time ago I've read (at least I _think_ I read it) that someone reverse-engineered the Skype protocol, so there maybe is the chance that a free Skype alternative, being compatible with Skype, will be created. I guess, we don't need to mimic Skype's proprietary protocol, because that would create patent-related problems in some parts of the world. What we need though, that's a WORKING and robust NAT traversal technique, be it in Ekiga or any other SIP-based softphone. Because that's what prevents them for working reliably everywhere. This is an interesting research project: http://www.goto.info.waseda.ac.jp/~wei/file/wei-apan-v10.pdf -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 03:44:11 +0200, C. P. Ghost wrote: On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote: On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 22:23:15 +0100, Frank Shute wrote: I think we have to wait for somebody to write a Skype clone and hopefully MS taking over Skype will provide the impetus (MS will drop the linux port as soon as they can). Some time ago I've read (at least I _think_ I read it) that someone reverse-engineered the Skype protocol, so there maybe is the chance that a free Skype alternative, being compatible with Skype, will be created. I guess, we don't need to mimic Skype's proprietary protocol, because that would create patent-related problems in some parts of the world. I don't see advantages in propretary protocols as of Skype. I just think I see the importance (as often found) that free software has to play nice with the proprietary ones, the established ones. Because users often require the free software to be like the proprietary one, this is one of the reasons that might make then switch. Often, it's not just about pure functionality (which, by the way, is the requirement to be met for anything to work properly), but it's also the usage share (cf. market share) of a certain product, technology, protocol or program. However, working SIP telephony programs for FreeBSD would enable the system to do lots of magic things, especially in combination with let's say Asterisk PBX. There is lots of potential in it, and it will be more and more important in the future. What we need though, that's a WORKING and robust NAT traversal technique, be it in Ekiga or any other SIP-based softphone. Because that's what prevents them for working reliably everywhere. This is an interesting research project: http://www.goto.info.waseda.ac.jp/~wei/file/wei-apan-v10.pdf The article sounds interesting upon first sight - I'll read that in detail. Thanks! -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
El día Saturday, June 18, 2011 a las 11:32:02PM +0100, Frank Shute escribió: On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 02:33:06PM -0700, Yuri wrote: Actually, ekiga is GTK app and isn't supposed to use any Qt. That's what I thought before I started building it but it dragged in all the qt stuff for some reason! I was a bit disgusted at the time as it had been advertised as a Gnome app. I've just tried rebuilding it but it bombs out in net/opal with C++ compiler errors. No signs of the KDE menu I was presented with when I last built it. Maybe I built the wrong port first time around by mistake... Try this for building ekiga from SVN/git: http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/Compile_your_own_SVN_version_of_Ekiga_on_FreeBSD It does use GTK and works in FreeBSD. matthias -- Matthias Apitz t +49-89-61308 351 - f +49-89-61308 399 - m +49-170-4527211 e g...@unixarea.de - w http://www.unixarea.de/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Any working SIP-phone on FreeBSD?
On 06/18/2011 22:10, Matthias Apitz wrote: Try this for building ekiga from SVN/git: http://wiki.ekiga.org/index.php/Compile_your_own_SVN_version_of_Ekiga_on_FreeBSD It does use GTK and works in FreeBSD. This HOWTO is truly amazing. Why don't they just fix the FreeBSD port instead of writing whole HOWTO? Yuri ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
