Sorenson's position on FCC

Should Sorenson videphone be allowed to other VRS providers?

  • Yes, my VP-100 should allow me to choose any VRS providers.

    Votes: 11 55.0%

  • No, I'd rather stay with Sorenson VRS.

    Votes: 3 15.0%

  • Don't care

    Votes: 1 5.0%

  • Doesn't matter - I have both DVC1000 and VP100.

    Votes: 3 15.0%

  • Use web cam with computer.

    Votes: 2 10.0%
  • Total voters
    20
  • Poll closed .
Dennis said:
Whereas when I see different numbers on my screen telling me my Sorenson VP gets 14 FPS (to everyone, VRS and one on one) while my D-Link gets 25FPS on the same connections, same settings, same IP address, same DMZ settings, same speed numbers, then I wonder if the numbers tell the true story.
Click to expand...


dennis this is not necessairly true comparison. i hate that cropped self view picture!
 
qwerty123 said:
me agree too. Take two dlink vp and hook up to your router and have one vp calls the other vp via private ip address. Then do the same with two Sorenson vp. Compare the results.

dlink vp is consider inferior to sorenson vp.
Click to expand...

While I haven't done that, I don't see how that's a "real world" comparism of how videophones work. I also don't imagine that the results will be different unless D-Link's videophone has a "cap" on the top end quality of the video, meaning that it's artifically crippled for some reason.

In any case, BOTH the VP-100 and DVC-1000 are based off of H.323 video compression technology.

Neither is using any updated video technology like H.264, so again, I just don't see how they could look better, and I've got no answer why my real world situation proves your "dlink vp is inferior to sorenson vp" statement wrong.

dennis this is not necessairly true comparison. i hate that cropped self view picture!
Click to expand...

Then please share what IS a true comparism! Please enlighten us!
 
qwerty123 said:
dlink vp is consider inferior to sorenson vp.
Click to expand...

Considered inferior by who? They are the same thing. The only differennce is the color and the software.
 
Ummm no... There is a difference between Sorenson and DLINK - if you recall before Sorenson got involved with VRS they were a video compression company for Quicktime and some of Apple's stuff so they have their own video compression software in those VP - which explains the quality of video.
 
The hardware is the same, the software is different. That's what I meant.
 
Actually maybe the hardware is the same but one part of the hardware is not the same is probably the chip - which holds the software.
 
DefLord said:
Actually maybe the hardware is the same but one part of the hardware is not the same is probably the chip - which holds the software.
Click to expand...

Absent any evidence to the contrary, I maintain that even the chip is the same.

To compare quality - looks the same. Never noticed a difference in fps, but someday I'll get around to an actual test.
 
I have both DLINK and VP-100. And I am an extensive user of VRS due to my job - I work in the Technology field. The quality of the pictures are much better with VRS with Sorenson than they are with other providers I have tried.
 
DefLord said:
I have both DLINK and VP-100. And I am an extensive user of VRS due to my job - I work in the Technology field. The quality of the pictures are much better with VRS with Sorenson than they are with other providers I have tried.
Click to expand...

"The quality of the pictures are much better" -- HOW? You never describe the quality -- you just say it's "better." You and I could argue all day and all night without getting anywhere because you can't back your argument up.

Since you nor anyone else has come up with a way to measure "quality", the only thing I can state is that MY frames per second are always higher, both ways, on my D-Link DVC-1000 vs a Sorenson VP-100 with the same speed settings and same network settings in my home from the same ISP.

Got a better measurement to use?
 
I go based on quality based on the blurriness... I get blurriness with my DLINK but I dont get it with my VP-100. I use it both at home and at work. That is how I based the quality.
 
DefLord said:
I go based on quality based on the blurriness... I get blurriness with my DLINK but I dont get it with my VP-100. I use it both at home and at work. That is how I based the quality.
Click to expand...

I have to ask: Did you try to adjust the focus on the lense? I have actually switched lenses between the Dlink and the VP 100. Both give me same results and no blur o either one.
 
Can you take some pictures to show us this phenomenon of "blurriness?" I'm taking my pictures now to post them for all to see. I don't think it'll show any blurriness that you seem to see.
 
Dennis said:
So, how do you compare the quality of the video? Hmm?
Click to expand...


Sorenson patented their own video compression algorithm (codec) used in their early products such as EnVision S-vision etc therefore sorenson might hav left out the video compression algorithm in D-link viedophone
 
well all system firmware CCD are both different! but for the device between vp-100 and dvc-1000 are most same!!! i believe !!!:)
Unless version A2 and A3 are different CCD device!!!
 
xentra said:
well all system firmware CCD are both different! but for the device between vp-100 and dvc-1000 are most same!!! i believe !!!:)
Unless version A2 and A3 are different CCD device!!!
Click to expand...

They do not use CCD, they are using the CMOS sensor. Be sure to check your work before posting.
 
NightwarriorJin said:
They do not use CCD, they are using the CMOS sensor. Be sure to check your work before posting.
Click to expand...

Yes u re right!! not CCD its CMOS (Image Sensor CMOS)
thanks
 
Back
Top