[asterisk-users] Softphone that supports central provisioning?

[Philipp Kempgen]

Tim Panton wrote:

> On 21 Apr 2007, at 13:06, Philipp Kempgen wrote:
> 
>> Tim Panton wrote:
>>
>>> On 21 Apr 2007, at 03:21, Philipp Kempgen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 11:48:20AM -0400, James FitzGibbon wrote:
>>>>>> Has anyone found a softphone that supports pulling it's
>>>>>> configuration from a
>>>>>> central server via TFTP/FTP/HTTP, much like hard desk phones use?
>>>>> Why would you want to do that?
>>>> Because you could provision softphones the way you provision hard
>>>> phones. Dynamic configuration through HTTP or even SIP messages.
>>>> That would really be great.
>>>>
>>>> I think it's a valid question and I've been searching for such
>>>> softphones as myself. They should be usable (so most of them fail)
>>>> and should work on a real OS (tm). And no Java please :)
>>> What's your objection to a softphone in java ?
>> Java is slow and the interface is always ugly and doesn't fit
>> into the window manager etc. you are used to. :-P I never understood
>> why I would use Java to write software when I could use C(++) or
>> when a script language would do.
> 
> I tend to agree with you there. If there is a scripting language to  
> do what
> you need- use it. But there is no scripting language I know with  
> realtime
> audio and access to UDP sockets.

Right. That's not one of the things you typically do in an
interpreted language. :)

> However Corraleta avoids these points by doing all the UI stuff in
> HTML, so users can customize it any way they like
> (see www.phonefromhere.com).
> 
> It lives in a browser, so the window
> manager thing doesn't apply (though to be honest what the
> other softphones do to the UI rules is pretty scary - see Xten).

Yeah.

> Best yet, the behavior is customizable in javascript - A thing I haven't
> seen in other softphones - yet.

Cool. I'll probably give it a try as soon as I find some time.

>> The simple fact that people have
>> 2 or 3 GHz doesn't mean that I have to burn them for nothing.
>> The only point may be portability. Do I miss something?
> 
> As to speed, you missed out on about 10 years of progress. A modern JVM
> is really no slower than the equivalent C++. One of the text-to-speech
> engines was ported to Java and ran faster due to the fact that the  
> memory
> management was smarter than in the C version. Startup is still a  
> problem,
> but people live with the startup time of KDE, so what can I say....

:)

Regards,
  Philipp

-- 
amooma GmbH - Bachstr. 126 - 56566 Neuwied - http://www.amooma.de
     Let's use IT to solve problems and not to create new ones.
           Asterisk? -> http://www.das-asterisk-buch.de

Geschäftsführer: Stefan Wintermeyer
Handelsregister: Neuwied B 14998