[Asterisk-Dev] The hardware codec integration

[Peter Grace]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I think this is an unfair assessment -- just because we
need to check our egos at the door does not mean we're
disagreeable to making asterisk faster in some cases by
using hardware DSP's from a company of disputed quality. 
My guess is that many people (including me) are just as
interested in seeing the answers to the questions you seek,
however my guess is very few people have the required
experience with the quicknet cards to take a stab at
fielding the question.

Simply stating "Oh, nobody's answering my question, and
meanwhile people are engaging in bigotry on the side, this
must mean nobody wants to help me" is a fallacy.  Some
people very much like to help, just can't speak
authoritatively on the subject (myself included.)

Finally, if Bayonne does what you need it to do better than
Asterisk, then you're more than welcome to say so.  Perhaps
we need to evaluate what Bayonne has that Asterisk does not
which makes this better, and share ideas between the
projects.  However, what you seem to be doing is pouting,
which often does nothing but raise the ire of the people
who put hours of work into making your life just a little
easier.
 
Just food for thought there.  Open source ceases to be a
fun hobby when all you hear from people is "THIS SUCKS I'M
LEAVING UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!~!!"!@!$"

Once again, back to my hole...

Pete



- -----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-dev-admin at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-dev-admin at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of
mawali at news.icns.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 3:08 PM
To: asterisk-dev at lists.digium.com
Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Dev] The hardware codec integration




I am trying to make a proof of concept here (I am using
quicknet because 
it is all I have that does hardware DSP). So I have been
asking quistions 
but I have not gotten any technical answer, just opinions.

And yes I almost got screwed too. But I made sure I asked
them in advanced 
if G729 will work on linux, and I did find there business
practices 
unfair. I have tried to make it clear to them.

I have done this in embedded systems so it is no rocket
science, but I was 
trying to see if I should just use bayonne or if the
asterisk community is 
open to ideas. I know I wont be missed!!

Regards


On Tue, 19 Aug 2003, Jeremy McNamara wrote:

> Bruce Ferrell wrote:
> 
> > Are you still torqued you couldn't get the DSP load for
> > free?  Is  that
> > what this is really about?
> 
> Free my ass.  My company paid Quicknet a hell of lot of
> money for  G.729,
> they gladly took my money and enabled it, only for win32,
> but they  didn't bother to tell me that until after the
> fact.  Then they had the  balls to tell me they couldn't
> refund my money.  So, yes, that is one  reason why I
> dislike Quicknet. 
> 
> There are many technical reasons too, but it is not worth
> my time to  get
> into it, again.
> 
> I will say again, buy Digium hardware, support Asterisk.
> 
> 
> Jeremy McNamara
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Dev mailing list
> Asterisk-Dev at lists.digium.com 
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
> 

_______________________________________________
Asterisk-Dev mailing list
Asterisk-Dev at lists.digium.com
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

- ---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.510 / Virus Database: 307 - Release Date:
8/14/2003
 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 7.0.3 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>

iQA/AwUBP0Jg+9W8rcEEsO4aEQL1TACfTeRGf3eioBa156HDdtRAWCO4swAAn34E
YdpTs+BDvcybvbFz8qjaQNy1
=gap1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.510 / Virus Database: 307 - Release Date: 8/14/2003