[Asterisk-Users] Prices of g729 codec

[trixter aka Bret McDanel]

On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 07:55 -0700, mgraves at mstvp.com wrote:
> For all the noise about this noone has mentioned one important thing.
> We should be gratefull that we have access to G.729a in Asterisk,
> whatever the mechanics of the licensing. It's obvious that its a pain
> in the a@# for Digium who absolutely not making ANY on it money for
> their efforts. It would be really easy for them to say "no more" and
> it wouldn't really impact their business at all, except to reduce
> their headaches.
>  
but they do in 2004 mark said it was one of their biggest revenue
streams.  Or do you mean that they dont make any money selling asterisk
under their business edition line?  Or maybe they dont make any money
selling the hardware to people who buy it to 'support' asterisk
development.  I believe that cnet said they made over $10M/year in an
article about an interview with mark.  

If $10M/year is not ANY money I would like to not make any money too.


> This will be especially true when they introduce their new hardware
> based transcoding engine. Why then should they
gee just like sangoma (only sangoma anounced it first :)

wonder if it will still use the zap interface and choke the system with
more interrupts than required.  I also wonder when asterisk will have
better sangoma support so you can cut your interrupts from say 1000/sec
to 50/sec.  But that probably wont happen in tree.


> Again, we should be gratefull! It could very easily go away
> altogether.
>  
the codec?  there will be alternatives for a licensed g729a and B (for
those that want to do VAD when that is implemented) codec for asterisk.


> Those of you constantly complaining...this is supposed to be a open
> source community...don't just demand a better licensing
> scheme...design and implement one. That can be your contibution to the
> project. I'm not a code jockey or I'd have a go myself.
>  
its being done.  Infact I am on the phone with some people talking about
that right now.  And have been for a little while (on/off for a couple
months).  

Now you say that you arent a code monkey so you are unable to write one,
but you can suggest what others should do.  Specifically code something
new.  Hmm sounds like you just did the very thing you are complaining
about.  So I am lost are you complaining about your post now or what?



All I have to say is that at least you can (aparently I still havent
tested it with asterisk) port your digium licenses for which you paid
when digium is closed but your business isnt :)

and to show that I am not just suggesting a different licensing model
but actually contributing here is the link to the BSD licensed code
(whee its not gpl) for a trivial program and thus is my contribution.
Note I have no disclaimer on file as the gpl is against my religion and
as such am barred from contributing to asterisk directly.

http://www.0xdecafbad.com/Remapping-function-calls.html


> 
-- 
Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com     Bret McDanel
Belfast IE +44 28 9099 6461    DE +49 801 777 555 3402
Utrecht NL +31 306 553058      US WA +1 360 207 0479
US NY +1 516 687 5200          FreeWorldDialup: 635378
http://www.trxtel.com we pay you to terminate calls with us!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20060607/7f3975cc/attachment.pgp