<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>TeamTalk discussion forum</title>
    <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/index.php</link>
    <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
    <language>EN</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 14:17:30 +0200</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 14:17:30 +0200</lastBuildDate>
    <category>TeamTalk discussion forum</category>
    <generator>Phorum 5.1.10</generator>
    <ttl>600</ttl>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: more motion = pixels and squares</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2182,2189#msg-2189</link>
      <author>kostay</author>
      <description><![CDATA[yes... i see]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2182,2189#msg-2189</guid>
      <pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 14:17:30 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Rebroadcast audio from other channel</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2184,2188#msg-2188</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi

If your users are administrators you can use:

TT_DoSubscripe(ttInst, userid, SUBSCRIBE_INTERCEPT_AUDIO);

Link: http://bearware.dk/teamtalksdk/v4.3a/CAPIDocs/group__commands.html#ga54fb7c84fa6707f11f385709456ae94d

This will enable you to hear what users are saying in other channels.


Outside a channel you cannot stream to the entire channel but you can stream an audio file to a user in the channel. You do this by using:

TT_StartStreamingAudioFileToUser(ttInst, userid, filename);

Link: http://bearware.dk/teamtalksdk/v4.3a/CAPIDocs/group__transmission.html#gacfb68014fb62065b6beb30eac5a5aeea


Another workaround could be that you use two TT client instances. Then you have one in each channel and you can use subscriptions to control who you want to hear.

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2184,2188#msg-2188</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 16:34:52 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Loopback Latency</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2183,2187#msg-2187</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi

The minimum setting supported is 20 msec. I'm not aware of a way of lowering it through e.g. registry settings.

I'll need to look into the new sound systems in Vista and Windows7 to get lower latency, i.e. WASAPI.

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2183,2187#msg-2187</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 16:25:50 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: more motion = pixels and squares</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2182,2186#msg-2186</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi

Most likely it's because video packets are being lost. Are their user icons blinking red?

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2182,2186#msg-2186</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 16:23:01 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: TeamTalk audio recording bug</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2177,2185#msg-2185</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi

I've tried to reproduce the problem when recording to a single file, but I'm always getting all the audio. I tested with three users and stored to .wav-format.

Can you find a simple way to reproduce the problem? E.g. how many users and which audio format.

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2177,2185#msg-2185</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 16:21:48 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Rebroadcast audio from other channel</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2184,2184#msg-2184</link>
      <author>dpol</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi,

I am trying to build custom application based on team talk SDK

I need rebroadcast audio stream comming from one channel to another channel trough client side with option to control audio level of the rebroadcasted stream.
This stream however should not go through line out of the client, i.e. stream that is broadcasted should go directly to other channel without be heard at client side. 

Is it possible to do it with current function set?]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2184,2184#msg-2184</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 04:44:57 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Loopback Latency</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2183,2183#msg-2183</link>
      <author>dpol</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi,

I am trying to use StartSoundLoopbackTest in order to generate loopback from microphone to headphones locally.
The client is translator from one language to another. He has to listen to himself in headphones without latency. The current latency is not acceptable.
Is there a way to decrease the latency? What is the minimum? Is it possible to change it outside Teamtalk (change DirectSound settings)?

Thanks,
Dani]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2183,2183#msg-2183</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 02:29:27 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] more motion = pixels and squares</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2182,2182#msg-2182</link>
      <author>kostay</author>
      <description><![CDATA[lets say 10 people sitting inforn of the cam == all good

when those people start to move, lets say dance, everything goes squares and pixels

i know it is theora thing, but

is there sollution for this? some kind of fine tuning may be?

Regards]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2182,2182#msg-2182</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 20:14:06 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: TeamTalk audio recording bug</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2177,2181#msg-2181</link>
      <author>mohaned1</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Oh, I forgot to mention that this only applies to the classic client. I don't know about the regular client.]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2177,2181#msg-2181</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:44:57 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: TeamTalk audio recording bug</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2177,2180#msg-2180</link>
      <author>mohaned1</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I would also like to report another bug I found with audio recording. If saving audio to disk with separate files for each user is selected, then when all the users stop transmitting, save audio mode is disabled. I think TeamTalk should keep the mode enabled as well as keep each user's file open and accessible until the user leaves the channel, then if they rejoin, the file should be fopened again in append mode and the audio begins right where it left off.]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2177,2180#msg-2180</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 22:43:39 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2179#msg-2179</link>
      <author>Barry</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Very interesting.  I'm surprised that more than one client instance can access the same server at the same time.  If that's true then it means that you should be able to use the SDK to create a client where multiple threads share the workload of decoding the video.  Perhaps as I suggested you could subscribe one instance to the video for the odd numbered users and the other to the even numbered ones.  As long as each instance runs in its own thread the workload distribution should be roughly equal.  And you don't need to stop there.  You could have as many threads and instances as you like.  Kind of a messy solution until the API itself is multi-threaded.  Bjoern your mission should you decide to accept it is to give the TT5 api the ability to share client instances across threads!

Barry]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2179#msg-2179</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 02:21:18 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2178#msg-2178</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Having several clients connecting to the same server is no problem. It's just that only one thread can access each client instance.

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2178#msg-2178</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2012 23:28:26 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] TeamTalk audio recording bug</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2177,2177#msg-2177</link>
      <author>mohaned1</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hello,
I would like to report a highly annoying bug in TeamTalk concerning the behavior of audio recording. When a single file for all users is selected, if someone starts transmitting while someone else is currently transmitting, the user who just started transmitting is not recorded. This results in large fraggments of conversations being left out of the audio file.]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2177,2177#msg-2177</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2012 22:59:08 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2176#msg-2176</link>
      <author>Barry</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I guess that means that you would need to run two or more servers.  Am I correct in saying that two instances of the client cannot connect to the same server at the same time?]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2176#msg-2176</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:46:56 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2175#msg-2175</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi Barry

Whenever you call one of the TT_* functions you lock that instance so other threads cannot access it. If multiple threads should be able to decode video then this locking strategy would have to be changed so multiple threads can access the same client instance. This would require quite a change in the design, so that's why I say supporting this is a big task.

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2175#msg-2175</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2012 16:11:52 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2174#msg-2174</link>
      <author>Barry</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Someone please humour me if I'm out to lunch on this but if you developed a client with the SDK couldn't you multithread the video decoding yourself.  Maybe you could have a scenario where video for the even number users would get decoded by thread A and odd numbered users processed by thread b.  In the long run I would think that would be simpler than having two client instances.  Since I don't do video I haven't looked at the functions that deal with the video very closely but it seems to me that you should be able to split the work up within the same client instance some how.]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2174#msg-2174</guid>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2012 07:46:25 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2173#msg-2173</link>
      <author>kostay</author>
      <description><![CDATA[oh...
just when i thought life is beautiful  :)]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2173#msg-2173</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 20:22:55 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2172#msg-2172</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi

No, not at the moment. It's a quite big task, since core parts of the API needs to be redesigned.

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2172#msg-2172</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:16:06 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2171#msg-2171</link>
      <author>kostay</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi Bjoern.

Do you plan to make teamtalk multi threaded?

Regards]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2171#msg-2171</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 17:38:55 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2168#msg-2168</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[The guy who was running 70 video sessions was running on Linux, so maybe Linux handles the UI updates in a better way than Windows.

On Windows you can also start two clients and have each client handle a subset of the users. That way you distribute users on separate cores.

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2168#msg-2168</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 14:14:14 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2167#msg-2167</link>
      <author>kostay</author>
      <description><![CDATA[hmm...

that means that it is limited to about 20 video streams with reasonable resolution and bitrate.

bacause i use Q9505 quad 2.8 Hz
so there is nothing more to improve really on the hardware side...]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2167#msg-2167</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 13:31:27 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2166#msg-2166</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[It's a bit complicated to explain but basically only one core on the CPU is handling the decoding of the video streams, so having more cores doesn't help easy the CPU usage. There are, however, ways in which TT can be optimized to distribute decoding on multiple cores but it's quite complicated to implement.

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2166#msg-2166</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 12:50:09 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2165#msg-2165</link>
      <author>kostay</author>
      <description><![CDATA[ok.... 640x480

23 cams in one TT are killing the program (the pc keeps on working good)
23 cams in two TT instances 10/13 is alright and works very good

Bjoern, is this given situation, because some kind of technical limit?

or can it be changer for good :)?]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2165#msg-2165</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:54:01 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2164#msg-2164</link>
      <author>kostay</author>
      <description><![CDATA[thats exactly the thing 
cpu is 30-50%

there is free mem
there is free net resources still....

now i have figured out, ony TT moves slow and ... like in &quot;breaks&quot;...

rest of the programs are ok...

we do open a lot of cams... may be 70-80... (240-160) but still pc resources are available 

should we try to use 32 bit ? (on windows 7 x64)?
may be linux client?
what do you say?]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2164#msg-2164</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 19:44:49 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2163#msg-2163</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[How much CPU does TT use? If it's running at 100% on one core then you're out of resources...

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2163#msg-2163</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:54:15 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2162#msg-2162</link>
      <author>kostay</author>
      <description><![CDATA[what could be bottleneck?

i know its not cpu(after upgrading to quad)
though it do use alots of cpu
when i open TT client with 25 cams with 640 resolution it chokes after few seconds
regrds]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2162#msg-2162</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 21:41:09 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2161#msg-2161</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[No, I haven't. You can try searching the Theora website for more info. http://www.theora.org

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2161#msg-2161</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 16:32:50 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2160#msg-2160</link>
      <author>ilayn</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Bjoern
tks a lot, do you have a paper with some measured performance on one of intels platorms?]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2160#msg-2160</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:58:37 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Re: Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2159#msg-2159</link>
      <author>bear_dk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hi

20 clients at 320X240 1 fps shouldn't be a problem. Once you increase the frame rate to 10 fps it might already start to choke. It's hard to say what the limit is. It also depends how much movement is in each video stream. All I can say is try and see what happens. You can always unsubscribe video streams to reduce the load.

One user told me that on his system it started to choke when he had 70 clients with 160x120 at 1 fps.

-- Bjoern]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2159#msg-2159</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 19:27:21 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>[General TeamTalk discussion] Perormance evaluation- cpu load, bit rate fps</title>
      <link>http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2158#msg-2158</link>
      <author>ilayn</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Hello 
I would to know if i own a server if can know on my 20 +clients at 
-what bit rates/resoultion/FPS the connected ?
for example 320X240 1 fps
- i would like to estimate whicn intel processor i need 
do you have a table cpu load per decoder?
for example on intel's i5 or i7 what is the cpu load for decode 640x480 1 FPS ?
and 10 FPS?
i need this to estimate how many clients can my cmputer handle before crashing

cheers.
ilan]]></description>
      <category>General TeamTalk discussion</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bearware.dk/phorum/read.php?1,2158,2158#msg-2158</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:59:08 +0200</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

