Topic: VC over Cable Modems: The ViaVideo/@Home deal
AndyN Wainhouse Research
Posts: 345 From: Sarasota FL USA Since: Jul 2000
posted 02 May 2001 12:12 PM
In WRB V2 #19 Andrew writes:
quote: Polycom Teams With Excite@Home
For those of you waiting to bring videoconferencing into the home without the quality problems of POTS, this is a long awaited announcement. Polycom is addressing the consumer video-conferencing market with its viaVideo USB device and an alliance with Excite@Home. This is an alliance to advertise and market Polycom's products to Excite@Home cable modem customers.
My Take
Well, the good news is that viaVideo will appeal to consumers with its low price, easy installation, and good performance. And as more consumers become familiar with videoconferencing, I think they will pull it into the enterprise, much like some of the multimedia peripherals (CDROMs and sound cards) migrated from home to office. The bad news is that this industry needs much more than an advertising and marketing alliance. Tech support is a killer issue here. Two people I know bought pairs of viaVideo devices to use on cable modems and couldn't get them to work - and the problem has nothing to do with the product. My own experience is that it's not uncommon to have a call and get two- way video and one-way audio, or some other equally confusing combination. IP has its complications, with some cable companies perhaps blocking some ports or doing something strange. And if you're using one of those very popular home routers for your DSL or cable line, they're great for everything except videoconferencing, which they easily defeat.
This is a tough nut to crack - high tech support issues combined with a low cost product. Nobody ever said it was going to be easy.
posted 02 May 2001 12:15 PM
A WRB reader, Joe O'Donnell, replies:
quote:
Andrew,
You were right on about the viaVideo/@Home issue. I have been testing the Viewstation and viaVideo over cable modems for a year now the results are terrible. Upstream restrictions and lack of a controlled environment kill the quality and consistency. Even using viaVideo between myself and my father over cable modems (my father is only three hops away, 10 miles, each hop only 8-11ms) and the quality was not good. We need dedicated connections for video, period! I don't think this @Home deal means much at all.
What do you think ??? Click on 'reply' and let us know ....
posted 03 May 2001 01:58 PM
We use the ViaVideo all the time from home. I'm on a DSL line (I requested 384 upstream and I think I got close :-). Others have cable modems. In fact, I was connected from e-learning in DC to a cable modem colleague in CA just two weeks ago...it was wonderful. Some of the issues we have found are:
1. Sometimes you need to throttle down the ViaVideo to 256 or 128. I have to throttle to 256 to get video working well... 2. Some folks have NATs on their line (either DSL or cable modem) that will kill H.323 communication. You will need to either physically go around it, or look at the Sorenson glasses like products to go thru them. 3. Some folks have firewalls (like Black Ice, etc) on DSL or cable...again you'll need to go thru, make the right definitions, or go around to get H.323 working.
The keys: If you can, request the highest upstream BW you can afford...request, if you can, several IP addresses rather than getting a NAT...throttle down as needed.
posted 08 May 2001 02:52 PM
Video conferencing over DSL and cable modems is a hobbyist market for the time being (and probably the next five years) because neither type of connection offers consistent QoS. Also, neither one of them is designed to hook to the TV set which is what most people will want to use for video conferencing.
The only way this changes is if you get widespread VPN services to residences + cheap, robust wireless networking + VC software and hardware incorporated into the settep box.
No one has announced any of this yet, which means we know it's no less than 2 years away for the very first units. I say this on the principle that all equipment companies issue press releases at least one Moore's Law generation ahead of their capabilities.
Beyond that, on the DSL side of the house the phone companies are having big trouble even rolling out crappy Internet hookups at 384/128 let alone what people would really demand before they'd pay for video conferencing. VPN is beyond them, and it's going to stay that way for quite a while. This is especially true with respect to ADSL, which has all kinds of issues with regard to latency and how to engineer IP and/or AAL.
On the cable modem side, the systems are highly asymmetric to begin with, and then you have the typical cable company that doesn't know squat about networking anyway. I've got something called "AT&T Broadband" at my house, and I'm lucky when I get 200 kbps. These people are going to give me a VPN service with adequate two-way broadband to support video conferencing. Yeah, when pigs fly.
WR Forums
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
posted 02 May 2001 12:12 PM
