[AusNOG] Katter backs Coalition - Windsor backs Gillard

[Michael Christie (micchris)]

Grahame, only because you asked....  HD is not necessary in the same way
that business class seats are not really necessary on an aircraft. The
difference comes when you move from occasional use to the normal way you
conduct business. If you spend a number of hours in a day on video, HD
gives you a truly personal meeting with all the subtlety of body
language and facial expressions. It makes it much easier to ignore the
technology and just get on with the business.

I know bacause I do it.

Mike.
(@Cisco)

-----Original Message-----
From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net
[mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Curtis Bayne
Sent: Tuesday, 7 September 2010 7:27 PM
To: Grahame Lynch; Lincoln Dale (ltd)
Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net; Bevan Slattery
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Katter backs Coalition - Windsor backs Gillard

Inmarsat BGAN (at 384kbps CIR) remains the weapon of choice for remote
reporting teams AFAIAA.

Will even do it over BRIs if you ask nicely enough ;)

Sent from my HTC Touch Pro

-----Original Message-----
From: Grahame Lynch <grahamelynch at commsdaymail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 7 September 2010 7:12 PM
To: Lincoln Dale <ltd at cisco.com>
Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>; Bevan Slattery
<Bevan.Slattery at staff.pipenetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Katter backs Coalition - Windsor backs Gillard

Honest question here Lincoln.

Why does it have to be HD?

Ive done alot of work in television broadcasting and have some firm
views
about this (and have seen first hand the difficulties going HD creates
for
professional TV productions in terms of production design, costuming,
lighting and make up). It adds complexity, and certainly isnt necessary
for
personal communications.

CNN now happily puts to air footage from Skype videocasts and satphones
that
work on 500k or less. It's not great and obviously broadcast quality
video
is desirable. But if CNN can rough it why is HD videoconferencing so
essential for normal people?

On 7 September 2010 16:06, Lincoln Dale <ltd at cisco.com> wrote:

> On 07/09/2010, at 6:53 PM, Paseka, Tomas wrote:
> > So when is Telepresense gonna be at a price point that the average
> > business can afford to buy it?
>
> certainly Cisco has "high end" with a range of products - and
certainly it
> has a "high end" price to go with it.
>
> but its not to say that there aren't alternate offerings - either from
the
> company i work for (who relatively recently also owns Tandberg) or
others.
>
> likely that your next phone handset will have semi-decent video if it
does
> not already.
>
>
> >
> > Or any other video conferencing solution for that point.
>
> little more than a couple of years ago, "HD video cameras" used to be
> incredibly expensive.  so did "prosumer" digital cameras.
> i'd expect the same to happen with any electronic goods as they become
> commodity goods due to increased demand driving increased supply.
>
> a lot of the 'enablers' for this are already happening - be it the
CMOS
> video sensors in volume or the DSPs to process HD video in
system-on-chip at
> low power levels.
>
> you can thank multiple reasons for this.  the automobile industry is a
huge
> reason.  so is security/surveilance industry.  and of course
> Apple/Android/(insert_handset_manufacturer_here).
>
>
> cheers,
>
> lincoln.
>  _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog