Sorenson ntouch

CharlesT said:
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?
Click to expand...

I started to answer your question last night, but decided it best to wait until I made it in to the office to do a proper sniff to give you accurate information.

Presently, when a Sorenson nTouch Mobile client on Android places a call, the Sorenson gateway 209.169.242.13 makes an H.323 H.225 Call Setup TCP port connection to 1720 and sends a SETUP message with the H.245 "fast start" capability set advertising only the genericVideoCapability (H.264). There is no H.263 offered in the capability set.

From the perspective of an H.323 sniff, the Sorenson FAQ is just flat out incorrect.

This is a factual statement given experimental data gathered from numerous call attempts today:

h245Control: 2 items
Item 0
H245Control item: 130 octets
H.245
PDU Type: request (0)
request: terminalCapabilitySet (2)
terminalCapabilitySet
sequenceNumber: 1
protocolIdentifier: 0.0.8.245.0.13 (h245 version 13)
mcCapability
..0. .... centralizedConferenceMC: False
...0 .... decentralizedConferenceMC: False
.... 0... rtcpVideoControlCapability: False
mediaPacketizationCapability
.... ..0. h261aVideoPacketization: False
rtpPayloadType: 2 items
Item 0
RTPPayloadType
payloadDescriptor: oid (2)
oid: 0.0.8.241.0.0.0.0 (iPpacketization_h241AnnexA(single NAL unit mode))
payloadType: 96
Item 1
RTPPayloadType
payloadDescriptor: oid (2)
oid: 0.0.8.241.0.0.0.1 (iPpacketization_RFC3984NonInterleaved)
payloadType: 96
0... .... logicalChannelSwitchingCapability: False
1... .... t120DynamicPortCapability: True
capabilityTable: 5 items
Item 0
CapabilityTableEntry
capabilityTableEntryNumber: 1
capability: receiveVideoCapability (1)
receiveVideoCapability: genericVideoCapability (5): ITU-T Rec. H.241 H.264 Video Capabilities
genericVideoCapability
capabilityIdentifier: standard (0)
standard: 0.0.8.241.0.0.1 (h264 generic-capabilities) - ITU-T Rec. H.241 H.264 Video Capabilities
maxBitRate: 2560
collapsing: 2 items
Item 0: Profile
collapsing item
parameterIdentifier: standard (0)
standard: 41 - Profile
parameterValue: booleanArray (1)
booleanArray: 64
Profile: 0x40, Baseline Profile

The other 4 capabilities are receiveUserInputCapability hookflash, basicString, dtmf, and encryptedIA5String. There are no other video capabilities.

Note that the RTP is also dynamic payload type 96 only (there is no payload type 34 for H.263 RFC2190 offered).


Simply put, no H.263. The Sorenson FAQ appears to be misrepresenting reality.
 
VRSEngineer: Well once again your post is very clear and presents raw facts. It’s very refreshing to see such accurate information as opposed to just speculation as is often the case.

From what you posted, it’s readily apparent that the only codec capability in the setup message is the (Item 0) H.264 capability.

Thanks for pointing out the payload type as well. Didn’t notice it at first, but after a re-read, one can see RFC3984 clearly spelled out and not RFC2190.

As they say on Mythbusters TV show “This one’s busted!”
 
VRSEngineer said:
I started to answer your question last night, but decided it best to wait until I made it in to the office to do a proper sniff to give you accurate information.

Presently, when a Sorenson nTouch Mobile client on Android places a call, the Sorenson gateway 209.169.242.13 makes an H.323 H.225 Call Setup TCP port connection to 1720 and sends a SETUP message with the H.245 "fast start" capability set advertising only the genericVideoCapability (H.264). There is no H.263 offered in the capability set.

From the perspective of an H.323 sniff, the Sorenson FAQ is just flat out incorrect.

This is a factual statement given experimental data gathered from numerous call attempts today:

h245Control: 2 items
Item 0
H245Control item: 130 octets
H.245
PDU Type: request (0)
request: terminalCapabilitySet (2)
terminalCapabilitySet
sequenceNumber: 1
protocolIdentifier: 0.0.8.245.0.13 (h245 version 13)
mcCapability
..0. .... centralizedConferenceMC: False
...0 .... decentralizedConferenceMC: False
.... 0... rtcpVideoControlCapability: False
mediaPacketizationCapability
.... ..0. h261aVideoPacketization: False
rtpPayloadType: 2 items
Item 0
RTPPayloadType
payloadDescriptor: oid (2)
oid: 0.0.8.241.0.0.0.0 (iPpacketization_h241AnnexA(single NAL unit mode))
payloadType: 96
Item 1
RTPPayloadType
payloadDescriptor: oid (2)
oid: 0.0.8.241.0.0.0.1 (iPpacketization_RFC3984NonInterleaved)
payloadType: 96
0... .... logicalChannelSwitchingCapability: False
1... .... t120DynamicPortCapability: True
capabilityTable: 5 items
Item 0
CapabilityTableEntry
capabilityTableEntryNumber: 1
capability: receiveVideoCapability (1)
receiveVideoCapability: genericVideoCapability (5): ITU-T Rec. H.241 H.264 Video Capabilities
genericVideoCapability
capabilityIdentifier: standard (0)
standard: 0.0.8.241.0.0.1 (h264 generic-capabilities) - ITU-T Rec. H.241 H.264 Video Capabilities
maxBitRate: 2560
collapsing: 2 items
Item 0: Profile
collapsing item
parameterIdentifier: standard (0)
standard: 41 - Profile
parameterValue: booleanArray (1)
booleanArray: 64
Profile: 0x40, Baseline Profile

The other 4 capabilities are receiveUserInputCapability hookflash, basicString, dtmf, and encryptedIA5String. There are no other video capabilities.

Note that the RTP is also dynamic payload type 96 only (there is no payload type 34 for H.263 RFC2190 offered).


Simply put, no H.263. The Sorenson FAQ appears to be misrepresenting reality.
Click to expand...

as I know you work for ZVRS but can you answer to my question. Sorenson is working well with Sprint, Purple and another which I have tested, but not for ZVRS? I know ZVRS is starting fraud now. The rep of ZVRS said I must sent VP200 back to Sorenson, WTF! they can't do that! MY god, your ZVRS........ needs...... to fuc..... stop....
 
lilbugsb3 said:
as I know you work for ZVRS but can you answer to my question. Sorenson is working well with Sprint, Purple and another which I have tested, but not for ZVRS? I know ZVRS is starting fraud now. The rep of ZVRS said I must sent VP200 back to Sorenson, WTF! they can't do that! MY god, your ZVRS........ needs...... to fuc..... stop....
Click to expand...

I try my best to not represent any given VRS provider, even one that I'm employed by, as the VRS industry as a whole deserves an unbiased and untarnished view of the engineering details.

Sorenson's nTouch Mobile is not working well with Sprint, as Sprint runs on the ZVRS platform, so I can dismiss your first assertion immediately. The Sprint SV4 videophone client is identical to the ZVRS Z4 videophone client, save the branding which is different. Underneath, they both home back to the same Mirial Carrier Server (MCS).

As for Purple: yes, the Vidsoft.de videophone client that Purple resells does indeed support H.264. It also supports H.263. We interwork with Purple just fine. Sorenson has chosen not to support backward compatibility with H.263, so they do not work with ZVRS or with a number of other videophones (including their own VP100). There are different flavors of H.264, there are devices that don't have enough CPU to do H.264, and even Sorenson's new nTouch VP supports H.263. So why is it that Sorenson's nTouch Mobile doesn't support backward compatibility for H.263?

Your vilification of ZVRS by allegation of fraud is tantamount to libel, but I am not a lawyer (I am an engineer) so please do not misconstrue that statement. It is, however, personally offensive to me, and to every other ZVRS employee who really do work hard to Do The Right Thing for our customers and the industry as a whole.

As to your assertion: ZVRS is subsidizing a phone. If you happen to have a Sorenson phone, ZVRS is willing to totally subsidize the price of the phone and give it to you for a predetermined period (12 months) for free, with the understanding that if you cancel your service before that time by porting away the number there will be an Early Termination Fee (ETF), as spelled out here:

Product Agreement - ZVRS

Sorenson has a current policy of sending an email to their customer after they receive the port-out request which includes links that if clicked by the customer is construed by Sorenson to mean that the customer wants to immediately port the phone number back to them. Customers are very confused and click links which are not adequately spelled out as to the action that Sorenson will take if the customer does so.

Many customers who wish to port to us are frustrated to find that Sorenson has ported numbers back to them when they have not signed a Letter of Authorization (LOA) to do so. This confuses the customer, who blame us for the screw up even though we weren't at fault, and causes many of them to go back and stay with Sorenson.

The current ZVRS policy is to get the customer to voluntarily agree and understand what is involved and sign a release agreement to allow ZVRS to act as an authorized agent to ship the VP200 phone back to Sorenson.

If you don't agree with this, you don't need to accept the full subsidy of the Z20 videophone (ie, get one for free): you're more than welcome to pay the same price as any other VRS customer would pay to obtain a Z20 for a ported number.

Sorenson isn't happy about this. This issue is undoubtedly not over yet. Lawyers are involved.

However, no fraud is occurring here. We have a VERY strong code of ethics at ZVRS:

Our Code of Ethics - ZVRS

If you have any proof of actual fraud occurring, I suggest you press the issue with Jeff Rosen, ZVRS general counsel:

ZVRS
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFU-OVtA7do]Jeff Rosen Joins The Z - YouTube[/ame]
 
Talking about porting between two providers, the major problem is that many deaf people have lack of understanding the clause and what going to happen. Their cognitive thinking are very poor, in term of judgements... and as you stated about code of ethics, many of installers/technicians do not follow code of ethics or understand completely about code of ethics. You know some installers/technicians want to take pride of his business where he work for and want to take away for those who he hate, hoping to win the customers over. I'm sure you heard many times the customers stated "They didn't tell me that??" or like what it stated above "The rep of ZVRS said I must sent VP200 back to Sorenson" or there are many more. Why is that? Lack of training? Maladaptive behavior? "D" or "d" pride? It's pretty frustrating to see all this non-conformitive actions. I been there and done that.. why this is happening? You know?
 
VRSEngineer said:
I try my best to not represent any given VRS provider, even one that I'm employed by, as the VRS industry as a whole deserves an unbiased and untarnished view of the engineering details.

Sorenson's nTouch Mobile is not working well with Sprint, as Sprint runs on the ZVRS platform, so I can dismiss your first assertion immediately. The Sprint SV4 videophone client is identical to the ZVRS Z4 videophone client, save the branding which is different. Underneath, they both home back to the same Mirial Carrier Server (MCS).

As for Purple: yes, the Vidsoft.de videophone client that Purple resells does indeed support H.264. It also supports H.263. We interwork with Purple just fine. Sorenson has chosen not to support backward compatibility with H.263, so they do not work with ZVRS or with a number of other videophones (including their own VP100). There are different flavors of H.264, there are devices that don't have enough CPU to do H.264, and even Sorenson's new nTouch VP supports H.263. So why is it that Sorenson's nTouch Mobile doesn't support backward compatibility for H.263?

Your vilification of ZVRS by allegation of fraud is tantamount to libel, but I am not a lawyer (I am an engineer) so please do not misconstrue that statement. It is, however, personally offensive to me, and to every other ZVRS employee who really do work hard to Do The Right Thing for our customers and the industry as a whole.

As to your assertion: ZVRS is subsidizing a phone. If you happen to have a Sorenson phone, ZVRS is willing to totally subsidize the price of the phone and give it to you for a predetermined period (12 months) for free, with the understanding that if you cancel your service before that time by porting away the number there will be an Early Termination Fee (ETF), as spelled out here:

Product Agreement - ZVRS

Sorenson has a current policy of sending an email to their customer after they receive the port-out request which includes links that if clicked by the customer is construed by Sorenson to mean that the customer wants to immediately port the phone number back to them. Customers are very confused and click links which are not adequately spelled out as to the action that Sorenson will take if the customer does so.

Many customers who wish to port to us are frustrated to find that Sorenson has ported numbers back to them when they have not signed a Letter of Authorization (LOA) to do so. This confuses the customer, who blame us for the screw up even though we weren't at fault, and causes many of them to go back and stay with Sorenson.

The current ZVRS policy is to get the customer to voluntarily agree and understand what is involved and sign a release agreement to allow ZVRS to act as an authorized agent to ship the VP200 phone back to Sorenson.

If you don't agree with this, you don't need to accept the full subsidy of the Z20 videophone (ie, get one for free): you're more than welcome to pay the same price as any other VRS customer would pay to obtain a Z20 for a ported number.

Sorenson isn't happy about this. This issue is undoubtedly not over yet. Lawyers are involved.

However, no fraud is occurring here. We have a VERY strong code of ethics at ZVRS:

Our Code of Ethics - ZVRS

If you have any proof of actual fraud occurring, I suggest you press the issue with Jeff Rosen, ZVRS general counsel:

ZVRS
Jeff Rosen Joins The Z - YouTube
Click to expand...

I do not care about it. ZVRS should not compare the between Sorenson and ZVRS but when ZVRS found out Sorenson released the new product, and ZVRS decided to remove the blog, WTF. I knew it. I am currently using NVP, I loving it. I called my friend on Sprint, it was working great, Purple great too, and even convo but ZVRS bam, black black black screen. therefore the ZVRS old system! PLUS I just forget that Z340 and z20 are tooooooo OLD while Sorenson released the modern and newest NVP. ZVRS is too dirty tho. I hope FCC take the action against ZVRS due to VAN that ZVRS travel alot in the USA which I am against and ZVRS decided to touch Sorenson VP, wtf! ZVRS is fucking jealous, my god.
 
lilbugsb3 said:
I do not care about it. ZVRS should not compare the between Sorenson and ZVRS but when ZVRS found out Sorenson released the new product, and ZVRS decided to remove the blog, WTF. I knew it. I am currently using NVP, I loving it. I called my friend on Sprint, it was working great, Purple great too, and even convo but ZVRS bam, black black black screen. therefore the ZVRS old system! PLUS I just forget that Z340 and z20 are tooooooo OLD while Sorenson released the modern and newest NVP. ZVRS is too dirty tho. I hope FCC take the action against ZVRS due to VAN that ZVRS travel alot in the USA which I am against and ZVRS decided to touch Sorenson VP, wtf! ZVRS is fucking jealous, my god.
Click to expand...

about 'compare' as you say its had removed, I look up and it still there
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-6DkwPVnqU]Let's Compare: The Z vs. Sorenson - YouTube[/ame]
 
We still have to be careful what you pick the service in order to get a free videophone because ZVRS has a penalty contract if you return it back to company within one year which charge you 250 dollars. If you have it for two years and you want to return it back which charge you 150 or 50 dollars. If you have it for three years, then there is no penalty. What a ridiculous! It's because FCC pays the relay services every month you know the rest of the story.

I have a Z-20, and I love it. It is not quite perfect features, but I'm pretty satisfied with mine.

By the way, I watched this video clip of ZVRS lab. I don't buy one of their story about Sorenson's deep debt. Many corporations do have some debts, but they can write off their tax which is no problem for them.
 
lilbugsb3 said:
I do not care about it. ZVRS should not compare the between Sorenson and ZVRS but when ZVRS found out Sorenson released the new product, and ZVRS decided to remove the blog, WTF. I knew it. I am currently using NVP, I loving it. I called my friend on Sprint, it was working great, Purple great too, and even convo but ZVRS bam, black black black screen. therefore the ZVRS old system! PLUS I just forget that Z340 and z20 are tooooooo OLD while Sorenson released the modern and newest NVP. ZVRS is too dirty tho. I hope FCC take the action against ZVRS due to VAN that ZVRS travel alot in the USA which I am against and ZVRS decided to touch Sorenson VP, wtf! ZVRS is fucking jealous, my god.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I'm kinda skeptical about your honesty regarding the "black black black screen" issue - simply because you've already shown your true colors - being biased toward Sorenson while putting blinders on.

Kinda sad to see people choose sides without being educated first about the hard cold facts - ie: what VrsEngineer mentioned, regarding compatibility.


webexplorer said:
We still have to be careful what you pick the service in order to get a free videophone because ZVRS has a penalty contract if you return it back to company within one year which charge you 250 dollars. If you have it for two years and you want to return it back which charge you 150 or 50 dollars. If you have it for three years, then there is no penalty. What a ridiculous! It's because FCC pays the relay services every month you know the rest of the story.

I have a Z-20, and I love it. It is not quite perfect features, but I'm pretty satisfied with mine.

By the way, I watched this video clip of ZVRS lab. I don't buy one of their story about Sorenson's deep debt. Many corporations do have some debts, but they can write off their tax which is no problem for them.
Click to expand...

Aye, corporations and individuals like us can maintain some level of debt, I agree (but what the heck do you mean, "write off their tax"?) - but companies do go into struggle and possibly go bankrupt if they find themselves too deep in debt. Being in debt means you owe someone else (or owe a company or bank) some money. They're going to want to be paid back eventually. Not saying Sorenson will struggle or go bankrupt, but at the same time, one can't automatically assume just because other corporation maintain some level of debt, that it means it's okay for other corporations to do the same with unlimited amounts of debt.
 
I learned something new. It is very interesting for you guys to know. Z20 released 5 years ago, and Z340 released 7 years ago, they have not released any new product yet so ZVRS has backordered and it is plenty so they need to rid of it. ZVRS saw Sorenson released the sickest product so ZVRS has decided to rid of them for free if port to Sorenson. Compare. Newer better than oldest shit ass.
 
lilbugsb3 said:
I learned something new. It is very interesting for you guys to know. Z20 released 5 years ago, and Z340 released 7 years ago, they have not released any new product yet so ZVRS has backordered and it is plenty so they need to rid of it. ZVRS saw Sorenson released the sickest product so ZVRS has decided to rid of them for free if port to Sorenson. Compare. Newer better than oldest shit ass.
Click to expand...

Why would you say that the older videophones are a piece of shit? I think that I would rather to use a Z-20 instead of VP-200. It is more convenience for me to chat someone on the Z-20 during TV commercial shows so that I would not miss my favorite TV show. :)

I don't see any new videophones for years. I guess that you are right about Sorenson's new product for the first time. Many regular videophones for hearies are horrible out there - too tiny and old looking designs.

What do you think about the tax write-off that save their corporation that I mentioned in my other post? Donald Trump has been using tax write-off for many years. Here is more about it: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500202_162-57324864/rich-and-famous-get-taxpayers-$9b-report/ I don't think that Sorenson isn't quite worry about it yet.
 
lilbugsb3 said:
I learned something new. It is very interesting for you guys to know. Z20 released 5 years ago, and Z340 released 7 years ago, they have not released any new product yet so ZVRS has backordered and it is plenty so they need to rid of it. ZVRS saw Sorenson released the sickest product so ZVRS has decided to rid of them for free if port to Sorenson. Compare. Newer better than oldest shit ass.
Click to expand...

You might want to check your facts on the 5 & 7 year figures. It is hilarious you are saying Z340 is 7 years old, do you realize that 7 years ago is before we even had 10-digit numbers? It was back when VRS software were still running on top of NetMeeting! You're a funny one :laugh2::laugh2:
 
5 years? That product has not existed for 5 years!

lilbugsb3 said:
I learned something new. It is very interesting for you guys to know. Z20 released 5 years ago, and Z340 released 7 years ago, they have not released any new product yet so ZVRS has backordered and it is plenty so they need to rid of it. ZVRS saw Sorenson released the sickest product so ZVRS has decided to rid of them for free if port to Sorenson. Compare. Newer better than oldest shit ass.
Click to expand...

You are incorrect. I work for ZVRS. Previous to that I worked in the Video conferencing industry for 15 years.

The Z-20 was release by ZVRS in MARCH 2011. The Z340 was released about two and a half years ago.

New products? Have you SEEN the Z4 mobile? Have you seen the NUMBER of mobile devices we work on? We connect to ANY deaf VP out there with Z4 mobile. No one else does that.

The Sorenson Ntouch is the same old product, with a new skirt and a really long neck (the camera)

We released the Z20 well BEFORE the Ntouch came out.

SVRS's systems refuse to play well with other PRODUCTION systems that follow the video conferencing STANDARDS.

I would like to know where you get your information from. I encourage you to take a step back and look at what we do. Before you label us the "BAD GUY" make certain you have FACTS.
 
lilbugsb3 said:
I learned something new. It is very interesting for you guys to know. Z20 released 5 years ago, and Z340 released 7 years ago, they have not released any new product yet so ZVRS has backordered and it is plenty so they need to rid of it. ZVRS saw Sorenson released the sickest product so ZVRS has decided to rid of them for free if port to Sorenson. Compare. Newer better than oldest shit ass.
Click to expand...

Z20 (an HD VP) was released 5 years ago? Where did you get that "fact."

You people should do your own research.

If you dont like the Z-20 deal, dont do it. whats the problem?
 
deafmattias said:
Z20 (an HD VP) was released 5 years ago? Where did you get that "fact."

You people should do your own research.

If you dont like the Z-20 deal, dont do it. whats the problem?
Click to expand...

Yep, and not to mention 7 years ago was back before 10-digit numbers were actually implemented! Someone is distorting the truth and not doing a good job at it.
 
lilbugsb3 said:
I learned something new. It is very interesting for you guys to know. Z20 released 5 years ago, and Z340 released 7 years ago, they have not released any new product yet so ZVRS has backordered and it is plenty so they need to rid of it. ZVRS saw Sorenson released the sickest product so ZVRS has decided to rid of them for free if port to Sorenson. Compare. Newer better than oldest shit ass.
Click to expand...

I'm really starting to wonder why I'm replying to your flamebait, but here are the facts:

Whomever "taught" you these facts is sorely misinformed.

The Z340 is the Creative InPerson. Creative announced it in January, 2008. The FCC mandated 10 digit dialing plan was not enforced until the beginning of 2009.

ZVRS worked with Creative to make the Z340 interoperable with the other VRS videophones. Z340s were available as soon as the iTRS dialplan permitted (the beginning of 2009).


The Z20 is the Tandberg E20, designed by Tandberg engineers in Oslo, Norway.

The Tandberg E20 started shipping March of 2009 to the hearing world (with pretty buggy firmware at the time: TE1.0). ZVRS started evaluating it internally at that time, and rejected firmware builds up to TE2.2.1, which was released by Tandberg in August, 2010. Until that point, the firmware was not interoperable with other VRS videophones.

After thorough interoperability testing and integration with the rest of the ZVRS platform features, ZVRS started shipping the z20 to testers in November of 2010. General deployment to customers really began the beginning of 2011.

I'm not sure what you mean by ZVRS having "backordered" Z20s, ZVRS buys new wholesale lots of phones from Cisco on an on-going basis and has an inventory to guarantee availability to customers but definitely no more than necessary to service our customer base demand at any given time.

You've also forgotten to mention the Z150 (Tandberg T150), Zojo (Worldgate Ojo), the Z4/SV4/VL4 (Mirial MCS) on your Android or iPhone/iPad2...

That's 4 different physical phones, and a soft phone that works on your MAC, PC, and just about any smartphone with a camera.

Sorenson has 1 physical phone, the nTouch VP, which like the VP200 (which they are now actively replacing) only hooks up to your TV. They have a PC client (with broken H.263), but no Mac client to speak of. And the Sorenson mobile client doesn't do H.263 at all, which means it can't call even their first generation VP100...

ZVRS has a unified set of My Contacts that are simultaneously available on all of the Z videophones in your profile.

Unlike Sorenson, ZVRS point-to-point videomail works when called from any deaf videophone.

ZVRS has always sent you a zalert email for all VRS _and_ point-to-point videophone calls.

ZVRS is the only VRS platform that supports 1Number calling that will ring up to 3 videophones along with a ZBox house flasher at the same time.

ZVRS has been innovating long before Sorenson. ZVRS continues to have more offerings than Sorenson. ZVRS continues to be more backward compatible than Sorenson.

Who is really innovating here?


These are the facts. Please supply yours.
 
I thought that Tandberg Company is in Germany. Well, I didn't know that. I was told that CISCO bought this company. I can't believe it because CISCO is so huge company and perhaps too greedy - maybe not.

Off record, I always think that CISCO is part of food packages what I see the trucks on the highway. :roll:
 
You might be confused with Sysco which you often seen on highways, that is food package supplier for many restaurants and food service providers. Cisco is completely different company.

webexplorer said:
Off record, I always think that CISCO is part of food packages what I see the trucks on the highway. :roll:
Click to expand...
 
VRSEngineer said:
ZVRS is the only VRS platform that supports 1Number calling that will ring up to 3 videophones along with a ZBox house flasher at the same time.
Click to expand...

legal? FCC state one number each videophone.

VRSEngineer said:
ZVRS has been innovating long before Sorenson.
Click to expand...

not true. Soresnon inovating long before CSD ZVRS came in the game there was en vision sl soft vp.
 
Back
Top