Sorenson ntouch

[Chevy57]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chevy57
Samsung Epic video cam is 1.3 MP. EVO is 0.3 MP. EVO video was poor quailty to call to SVP 200.

lilbugsb3
I already saw it that my friend call me on his EVO on my VP and the video is so good. Its not too blurry or anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Highlander
MP is for pictures only, not video. The lux is very important for live video.

What do you think of iPhone 4's front camera for Facetime? Clear or blurry?

yes. Facetime video is clear and no blurry. Call from FT to FT is very clear but Call from FT to EVO or Epic is blurry. Facetime video quality is stronger than Qik.


chevy,

you think htc evo's maintstream or vp is blurry all of them ... no, no, not all of them.... some very good ..some blurry..where live city area, states.. my htc evo mainstream call to vp200 no blurry no problem

nTouch EVO to nTouch EVO video quality still be blurry. See short video of deaf nation vlog on time 7:16. New Products: ntouch PC & Mobile by Sorenson

 

[MacFreak]

I m surpised to see that Z4 mobile video quality is clear on iphone4 compared to Epic or EVO. We tested and noticed nTouch on EVO is kinda of blurry. Even, we tested on VP200 can tell its blurry even its on wifi. Its not software based. I suspected its EVO's camera.

 

[Chevy57]

I m surpised to see that Z4 mobile video quality is clear on iphone4 compared to Epic or EVO. We tested and noticed nTouch on EVO is kinda of blurry. Even, we tested on VP200 can tell its blurry even its on wifi. Its not software based. I suspected its EVO's camera.

Yes, QIK video quality on EVO is not good. FaceTime video quality is best. Some Android wants FT but Steve Jobs not yet give FT software to them and PC.

 

[MacFreak]

Ahh.. I see.

 

[netrox]

The video doesn't say much about what device you need to use it and it's mostly how it brings you freedom... we know what it means, we want to know... WHAT device do I need for that?!?!

 

[web730]

The video doesn't say much about what device you need to use it and it's mostly how it brings you freedom... we know what it means, we want to know... WHAT device do I need for that?!?!

Yup! :roll:

They have FAQ answers for nTouch PC only this time so we have no idea which mobile products that are compatible with the nTouch Mobile software.

Any mobile phone with 3G and/or 4G?

 

[TechBill]

Yup! :roll:

They have FAQ answers for nTouch PC only this time so we have no idea which mobile products that are compatible with the nTouch Mobile software.

Any mobile phone with 3G and/or 4G?

nTouch PC - any computer with Windows and webcam

nTouch Mobile -only HTC EVO right now because it require Android 2.2 other mobile will be supported near future when they are updated to 2.2 Android and have front camera

 

[web730]

nTouch PC - any computer with Windows and webcam

nTouch Mobile -only HTC EVO right now because it require Android 2.2 other mobile will be supported near future when they are updated to 2.2 Android and have front camera

nTouch Mobile - the only product we need to know which Mobile types it currently works with so there you answered it.

Sorenson ought to provide details, not hype;that is all we need.

 

[TechBill]

nTouch Mobile - the only product we need to know which Mobile types it currently works with so there you answered it.

Sorenson ought to provide details, not hype;that is all we need.

The details are provided on their own website

ntouch Mobile Application | Sorenson VRS®


At the web address above it mentions "Have an HTC EVO mobile device"



.

 

[web730]

The details are provided on their own website

ntouch Mobile Application | Sorenson VRS®


At the web address above it mentions "Have an HTC EVO mobile device.

Yup, I later found it the next day - oops, they sure did but thanks!

(it was on another page that I overlooked at the first place)

 

[northernsydney]

Thank you for giving this wonderful information. I am almost certain he's one of the top echelon at Sorenson.

 

[Chevy57]

I had discussed with Sorenson agent about nTouch PC and mobile last few weeks. I asked him why can't compatible with P3, Z4 and other VRS mobile/computer. He told me that they don't have H.262 video codec. He said FCC requires to add it in all of them. So he asked me to install new nTouch mobile app on my iPhone 4 but I refuse it and being enough to have other apps as P3 and Z4. What do you think about requiring H.262 for all of them?

 

[VRSEngineer]

First, there are 3 video codecs involved here.

H.323 _requires_ H.261 if your endpoint supports video at all. Unfortunately, H.261 is so old and so low-resolution that very few H.323 capable endpoints today actually support it as they should. This requires the most bandwidth, but requires the least CPU to encode/decode.

There is no H.262. (Well, there is, but it simply isn't used by telepresence endpoints). I think you may have misunderstood your Sorenson agent, or your Sorenson agent was misinformed.

H.263 is the video codec that has been supported by all deaf video phones since NetMeeting in the early days of VRS. It has been the defacto video codec for all deaf video phones as everyone supports it. This requires slightly less bandwidth than H.261 for the same resolution/framerate, but it also requires a bit more CPU to encode/decode. There is no requirement for any H.323 endpoint to use H.263, it is entirely optional. On the other hand, it has universally been available in all VRS videophones up to the Sorenson nTouch endpoints. More on this below.

H.263 RFC2190 payload type 34 is the most compatible video codec negotiated between endpoints simply because most endpoints support it.

There is also H.263+ (aka H.263 1998 or H.263v2) and H.263++ (aka H.263 2000 or H.263v3) which use a dynamic payload type, and have aspects of H.264 integrated into them. Many endpoints also support these as well, but not all do.

H.264 is the "new" codec supported by newer endpoints. It uses the least amount of bandwidth for the same resolution/framerate, but it also requires an order of magnitude more CPU power to encode/decode. There is no requirement for any H.323 endpoint to use H.264, it is entirely optional.

There are many H.264 "profiles". This includes RCDO (reduced complexity decode option), baseline, main, and a mess of "extensions". There is a difference between H.264 AVC (Advanced Video Codec), and H.264 SVC (Scalable Video Codec), the latter of which is used in the newest of endpoints from Vidyo and Google Talk.

The key thing to realize with H.264 is that there are many different profiles, and even more proprietary extensions. Simply put, getting two endpoints to negotiate a flavor of H.264 that each other likes is not a trivial action, and is fraught with interoperability negotiation problems and bugs.

Presently, the Mirial mobile device software videophone used by most of the VRS providers only supports H.263.

But, again, this should be ok. All VRS endpoints up to this point had supported H.263.

Sorenson has effectively broken H.263 in their nTouch PC version. The RFC2190 RTP media generated by their nTouch PC version is playable by other standard H.263 capable endpoints, but their PC version _refuses_ to play the H.263 video sent to it. This means that the nTouch PC shows black video, but whomever they call sees the video just fine.

Sorenson has also disabled H.263 entirely in their nTouch mobile version. It _only_ does H.264 AVC baseline. This alienates all of the H.263 capable deaf video endpoints.

As to SIP vs H.323, don't get me started. That's about signalling and codec negotiation, and is a topic into itself.

The FCC requires no video codec. Of any kind. If they were wise, they would require H.263. But that's not what the FCC does, or at least not yet. Someday, maybe.


I just did a quick google, and I found this webpage that shows which codecs each endpoint supports:

http://www.salyens.com/interop/index.html

Notice how most of these videophones suport H.263?

Until there is some kind of government regulated requirement, VRS providers should be trying to build endpoints that are backward compatible. It's kinda impossible to be _forward_ compatible.

For example, it's not like we have the source code to the Dlink DVC1000 (what Sorenson put out as the VP100) to add H.264 to that videophone. That's right, a Sorenson VP100 can't call an nTouch. Don't you find that rather odd?

Please ask more questions, I'm glad to answer them in as much engineering detail as you can bear

 

[LakeTahoe]

Our good friend of our have EVO, and my hubby borrowed his EVO for couple of min to chat on Ntouch with me on VP...pretty cool! Making sure we are ok etc.. Now I have it on my iPod...hubby did tested it and it is ok but great for emergency if need call dr or whatever....

 

[FishWrangler]

Well said and very informative as usual.

First, there are 3 video codecs involved here.

H.323 _requires_ H.261 if your endpoint supports video at all. Unfortunately, H.261 is so old and so low-resolution that very few H.323 capable endpoints today actually support it as they should. This requires the most bandwidth, but requires the least CPU to encode/decode.

There is no H.262. (Well, there is, but it simply isn't used by telepresence endpoints). I think you may have misunderstood your Sorenson agent, or your Sorenson agent was misinformed.

H.263 is the video codec that has been supported by all deaf video phones since NetMeeting in the early days of VRS. It has been the defacto video codec for all deaf video phones as everyone supports it. This requires slightly less bandwidth than H.261 for the same resolution/framerate, but it also requires a bit more CPU to encode/decode. There is no requirement for any H.323 endpoint to use H.263, it is entirely optional. On the other hand, it has universally been available in all VRS videophones up to the Sorenson nTouch endpoints. More on this below.

H.263 RFC2190 payload type 34 is the most compatible video codec negotiated between endpoints simply because most endpoints support it.

There is also H.263+ (aka H.263 1998 or H.263v2) and H.263++ (aka H.263 2000 or H.263v3) which use a dynamic payload type, and have aspects of H.264 integrated into them. Many endpoints also support these as well, but not all do.

H.264 is the "new" codec supported by newer endpoints. It uses the least amount of bandwidth for the same resolution/framerate, but it also requires an order of magnitude more CPU power to encode/decode. There is no requirement for any H.323 endpoint to use H.264, it is entirely optional.

There are many H.264 "profiles". This includes RCDO (reduced complexity decode option), baseline, main, and a mess of "extensions". There is a difference between H.264 AVC (Advanced Video Codec), and H.264 SVC (Scalable Video Codec), the latter of which is used in the newest of endpoints from Vidyo and Google Talk.

The key thing to realize with H.264 is that there are many different profiles, and even more proprietary extensions. Simply put, getting two endpoints to negotiate a flavor of H.264 that each other likes is not a trivial action, and is fraught with interoperability negotiation problems and bugs.

Presently, the Mirial mobile device software videophone used by most of the VRS providers only supports H.263.

But, again, this should be ok. All VRS endpoints up to this point had supported H.263.

Sorenson has effectively broken H.263 in their nTouch PC version. The RFC2190 RTP media generated by their nTouch PC version is playable by other standard H.263 capable endpoints, but their PC version _refuses_ to play the H.263 video sent to it. This means that the nTouch PC shows black video, but whomever they call sees the video just fine.

Sorenson has also disabled H.263 entirely in their nTouch mobile version. It _only_ does H.264. This alienates all of the H.263 capable deaf video endpoints.

As to SIP vs H.323, don't get me started. That's about signalling and codec negotiation, and is a topic into itself.

The FCC requires no video codec. Of any kind. If they were wise, they would require H.263. But that's not what the FCC does, or at least not yet. Someday, maybe.


I just did a quick google, and I found this webpage that shows which codecs each endpoint supports:

http://www.salyens.com/interop/index.html

Notice how most of these videophones suport H.263?

Until there is some kind of government regulated requirement, VRS providers should be trying to build endpoints that are backward compatible. It's kinda impossible to be _forward_ compatible.

For example, it's not like we have the source code to the Dlink DVC1000 (what Sorenson put out as the VP100) to add H.264 to that videophone. That's right, a Sorenson VP100 can't call an nTouch. Don't you find that rather odd?

Please ask more questions, I'm glad to answer them in as much engineering detail as you can bear

 

[FishWrangler]

Just a thought but if Sorenson was to make their endpoint backwards compatible with H.263 then wouldn't that downgrade the video call on both endpoints from H.264 to H.263? It sounds like Sorenson's moving forward with the new codec and the other VRS endpoints need to do the same.

H.264 is the "new" codec supported by newer endpoints. It uses the least amount of bandwidth for the same resolution/framerate, but it also requires an order of magnitude more CPU power to encode/decode. There is no requirement for any H.323 endpoint to use H.264, it is entirely optional.

 

[Jiro]

at deafnation expo, I had a sneak peek at its product that hasn't been announced or revealed to public yet. It's still in testing phase. I've gotta say I was bit impressed. I made a couple of recommendations so let's see if they listened or not

 

[VRSEngineer]

Just a thought but if Sorenson was to make their endpoint backwards compatible with H.263 then wouldn't that downgrade the video call on both endpoints from H.264 to H.263? It sounds like Sorenson's moving forward with the new codec and the other VRS endpoints need to do the same.

What's worse? "Downgraded video", or "no video at all"?

Note: "downgraded video" is the same video you use on your videocalls everyday, today. There is also no guarantee that the H.264 video will be any "better" than H.263 video. Probably smaller bandwidth, definitely require more CPU to encode/decode, but not necessarily better, particularly if the CPU is saturated at 100% trying to keep up to a live stream.

Again, you can only add support for H.264 if you have a device that has enough CPU power to encode/decode H.264 video (many do not), and if you have the sourcecode to the codec implementation on that device.

This is why devices need to be backward compatible, to allow phonecalls to older videophones that don't have enough CPU power and/or support from the hardware vendor to add such support.

 

[FishWrangler]

What's worse? "Downgraded video", or "no video at all"?

Note: "downgraded video" is the same video you use on your videocalls everyday, today. There is also no guarantee that the H.264 video will be any "better" than H.263 video. Probably smaller bandwidth, definitely require more CPU to encode/decode, but not necessarily better, particularly if the CPU is saturated at 100% trying to keep up to a live stream.

Again, you can only add support for H.264 if you have a device that has enough CPU power to encode/decode H.264 video (many do not), and if you have the sourcecode to the codec implementation on that device.

This is why devices need to be backward compatible, to allow phonecalls to older videophones that don't have enough CPU power and/or support from the hardware vendor to add such support.

You raise good points there, thanks for the answer.

 

[CharlesT]

Sorenson has also disabled H.263 entirely in their nTouch mobile version. It _only_ does H.264 AVC baseline. This alienates all of the H.263 capable deaf video endpoints.

Please ask more questions, I'm glad to answer them in as much engineering detail as you can bear

VRSEngineer, first I want to publicly thank you for your posts. Every single one that I have read is VERY informative and really helps cut through the lack of available information, and misinformation, on these technical topics.

I was reading the Sorenson nTouch mobile faqs both for Android and iPhone/iOS and they both state:

Question: "Will I be able to make calls to other videophones (VP-to-VP or point-to-point calls)?"

Answer: "Yes, you will be able to call any VP-200 and/or any videophone or endpoint device that supports industry video standards (H.323 and H.264). The device must also have been provisioned with the NeuStar database (provisioning is handled by the default VRS provider for a given phone number)."

To view the original text click on the links below and expand the "Features" section then scroll down to the listed question:
Sorenson ntouch faq for Android Phones
Sorenson ntouch faq for iPhone

Could it be that they have now added H.263 support into the nTouch mobile, or is the Sorenson faq just flat out incorrect?