Sure, I wasn't really thinking of bktr, which as I understand is a
video capture card and as such has onboard electronics for image
processing. Evidently, this in combo with a normal cam is the best in
terms of resolution/low cpu load.
I was aiming more for the post comparing 40$ usb webcam/100$ i
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:00:57PM +0100, michael hamerski wrote:
> I guess for security monitoring stuff, having a decent driver for a
> decent webcam would be nice. However, with the current trend to
> offload all peripheral processing onto the host CPU this can be a
> mixed blessing. For example
I guess for security monitoring stuff, having a decent driver for a
decent webcam would be nice. However, with the current trend to
offload all peripheral processing onto the host CPU this can be a
mixed blessing. For example, in '96 with a BW Quickcam my PC hardly
broke sweat for videoconfrencing,
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 03:24:06PM -0500, Claus wrote:
> On 3/24/2008 3:20 PM, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 01:45:24PM -0500, Claus wrote:
> >>On 3/23/2008 4:57 PM, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> >>>On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 12:31:31PM -0700, Predrag Punosevac wrote:
> >>>
> Moreover it
On 3/24/2008 3:20 PM, Jacob Meuser wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 01:45:24PM -0500, Claus wrote:
On 3/23/2008 4:57 PM, Jacob Meuser wrote:
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 12:31:31PM -0700, Predrag Punosevac wrote:
Moreover it is also hard to justify time
spend in hacking those things if there is rela
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 01:45:24PM -0500, Claus wrote:
> On 3/23/2008 4:57 PM, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> >On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 12:31:31PM -0700, Predrag Punosevac wrote:
> >
> >>Moreover it is also hard to justify time
> >>spend in hacking those things if there is relatively inexpensive
> >>hardwar
On 3/23/2008 4:57 PM, Jacob Meuser wrote:
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 12:31:31PM -0700, Predrag Punosevac wrote:
Moreover it is also hard to justify time
spend in hacking those things if there is relatively inexpensive
hardware solution (video input devices supported by
bktr can be bought for abou
Hmm. I didn't realize there was an open standard for USB webcams.
>From the Wiki: "* These devices also have non-UVC equivalents by the same
>name. Please check the product number to confirm UVC compatibility."
So, how common are these devices? Will they continue to be produced according
to
Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
"Unix Fan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So who's working on OpenBSD's implementation? get busy!! :D :D :D
IIRC, someone's working on a webcam USB driver for NetBSD. I'd suggest
to wait 'till that works and then port it.
There's also this:
http://www.netbsd.org/cont
2008/3/25, Lars NoodC)n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sunnz wrote:
> > ... things like Skype would be nice to communicate ...
>
> *Like* skype but *not* actually skype itself, please.
>
> Skype is neither open source nor open protocol. Two strikes. It's got
> a rather bad security history. Three st
Sunnz wrote:
> ... things like Skype would be nice to communicate ...
*Like* skype but *not* actually skype itself, please.
Skype is neither open source nor open protocol. Two strikes. It's got
a rather bad security history. Three strikes.
Try for FOSS programs, but if you can't do that, then
Hey guys, thanks for the replies... remember that my original intend
was to build a cheap home monitoring/surveillance system using free
open source softwares and OpenBSD just come to mind naturally... I
mean, the goal is the capture live footage of your own house, who
doesn't want it to be as secu
"Unix Fan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So who's working on OpenBSD's implementation? get busy!! :D :D :D
IIRC, someone's working on a webcam USB driver for NetBSD. I'd suggest
to wait 'till that works and then port it.
--
Jonathan
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 01:34:24PM +0100, Pau Amaro-Seoane wrote:
> ok, I have to apologise.
>
> I don't mean to be unpolite but, please understand me:
>
> I don't think there exists another OS as OpenBSD. It's unique.
>
> I am afraid that the more popular it will become, the more thingies
> new
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 03:04:13PM +0300, Michael Spratt wrote:
> And by the way if you have ever used a webcam now days they are no longer
> pixilated... You must still be living in 1998. Of course you are a "real"
> computer user and real computer users don't need webcams because they only
> ne
o linux, no windows") using obsd
> as a desktop on a laptop STOP webcams are as useful as automatic
> chewing-gum machines FULL STOP
>
> Before you carry on making use of the two adjectives you know (lame
> and rude), please be so kind as to pretend that you do not exi
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 01:21:41PM +0100, Pau Amaro-Seoane wrote:
knock it off. your response was pointless.
> I think you don't understand what obsd is about
I don't think you do either.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Pau Amaro-Seoane
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 1:52 PM
> To: Unix Fan
> Cc: misc@openbsd.org
> Subject: Re: PC Camera?
>
> who cares about web cams? What's so important in looking at a pixeled,
> almost-static f
and code auditing. OBSD also has a role as a
desktop system.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Pau Amaro-Seoane
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 1:52 PM
To: Unix Fan
Cc: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: PC Camera?
who cares about web cams? What's s
who cares about web cams? What's so important in looking at a pixeled,
almost-static face?
I have still not understood what they are good for.
I do understand what pf good for is.
I do understand what a public, anonymous CVS server good for is
I do understand what security and code auditing goo
There is a USB standard for USB Cameras among other video devices... It's
called "USB Video Device Class".
The specific is available to download... if anyone feels brave enough to write
a driver for "UVC" class devices... ;)
@Sunnz, Unsupported USB devices always attach to "ugen", read the
On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 12:31:31PM -0700, Predrag Punosevac wrote:
> Moreover it is also hard to justify time
> spend in hacking those things if there is relatively inexpensive
> hardware solution (video input devices supported by
> bktr can be bought for about $150 now vs a good USB camera is pr
BSD I had it
> going, but what about the webcam? Are there much webcam support for
> it?
>
> I have plugged in my old webcam in to the USB port just to see what
> gives... it reports the ugen0 device, Vimicro Corp. PC Camera, rev
> 1.10/1.00, addr 10... if it got this far inste
, but what about the webcam? Are there much webcam support for
> > > it?
> > >
> > > I have plugged in my old webcam in to the USB port just to see what
> > > gives... it reports the ugen0 device, Vimicro Corp. PC Camera, rev
> > > 1.10/
C and OpenBSD I had it
> > going, but what about the webcam? Are there much webcam support for
> > it?
> >
> > I have plugged in my old webcam in to the USB port just to see what
> > gives... it reports the ugen0 device, Vimicro Corp. PC Camera, rev
>
; it?
>
> I have plugged in my old webcam in to the USB port just to see what
> gives... it reports the ugen0 device, Vimicro Corp. PC Camera, rev
> 1.10/1.00, addr 10... if it got this far instead of being "not
> configured", does it mean it has some support for it?
>
ugen0 device, Vimicro Corp. PC Camera, rev
1.10/1.00, addr 10... if it got this far instead of being "not
configured", does it mean it has some support for it?
What should I do next?
Thanks.
27 matches
Mail list logo
