Thomas

The lack of serial number means most likely that it is a pirated card. The standard version of Geovision probley isn't going to work with it.

If they just need to see who is ringing a door bell then why bring a DVR into it at all? Camera to Used TV would be enough for them and alot cheaper. And while for some home users, that's all they need, it's a bad idea to have them treat the system as a toy. If they do need the recording to work, and it fails due to someone screwing around with the system, then what good was it?

Please for the love of god do not change the tube. Picture tubes are large capacitors and are rather dangerous to play with.

Don't go with the Dimension line. They are ment to be casual use workstations. http://configure.euro.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=uk&cs=ukbsdt1&kc=305&l=en&oc=SC094301&s=bsd&sbc=pedge_430sc_ide Look at thier server machines.

For an application like this, the machine is going to need to be dedicated: 1. It's mission critical. If your DVR fails when something bad happens, then what good is it? So you treat it like a mission critical machine. You don't web surf, you don't do things that put the machine at risk. 2. Processing power. Video Encoding is CPU intenstive. Maxing out your CPU can cause problems with video.

Generally SDK's aren't free for smaller types of software. Techincal support for an SDK is expensive, above and beyond what normal tech support requires.

Eh, I'd suggest the painball method for this.

Learn something new everyday. I didn't realize the boards would self-moderate that.

I'm calling bull****. It's taken years to get from 75% to 80% and magicly they get to 98%? For a claim like that I need independant verification. Some in-house lab test without proper controls just doesn't cut it.

Yes Rory, providing IP based cameras is a completely differant industry. Change out IP cameras in that analogy with Cat5 and Baluns and see if you still feel that way.

Matrox makes some. Or you can stack dual monitor cards. Matrox is going to be expensive. Do some research to make sure mobo/card/capture card are going to play well together, same with the dual monitor stacking.

The marketing hype of IP side is rather bad, and alot of it borders on lies. But at the same time, the knee jerk reaction of the analog world to IP is just as bad. These are tools people. You don't use a hammer when you should use a screw driver.

Um, you wire a seperate network, segrate via switches or use any other of a dozen methods. And the NVR is not on the same network as the users.

Rory, that's a crappy arguement. How many people can barely operate a VCR. Most people can't even program them to not flash 12:00. The UI benfits of a standalone just don't exist.

Given my role in the industry, I will refrain from offering lists. But I'm sure someone can in a little while. But you're going to generally find that card and software are tied together, rather then seperate items.

No, they have had facial recognition systems. Given that they still have yet to break 80% accuracy, it doesn't meet the standards for reliable yet.

There maybe a person who will recognize this, but it's a kinda good news, bad news situation. The good news is that you will learn a vaulable lession from this. The bad news is that the lession is the cost of the card.

No, but he could have other forms of legal liability. In the USA, a court order could be obtained for such footage, either by Police or lawyers in a civil case. Which would make it harder for Rory to make money on beyond the install.

If you can try to put a name to the card that might help. But most likely you are stuck with software it came with.

We aren't using anything really tricky. The image displayed is a jpeg, and we use a javascript comand to force refresh and ask for the next image. There shouldn't be any codec issue at all because in this case it's not video. Just a single JPEG image. This is going to be out of left field but could you try it with a Palm not tied to Verizon?

Because NVRs are no more upgradable then DVRs. Either it's an embeded unit that can have a firmware update or not, or it is a PC based unit that can get software upgrades. You may end up being able to do more camera on a single machine but you could also say that just makes you dependant on single failure point. The other major problem is that IP/Network based cameras do not have anything resembling standard access protocols for software clients that aren't webbrowsers. Accessing Sony cameras will not give you access to Toshiba which won't give you access to Axis. Hell, even firmware revisions can break software compatability. We ran into that with firmware updates to the Toshiba cameras. Wireless, if you consider "lack of upgrade ability" to be a killing point, how is "vendor lock-in" any better? These are tools. There are times when one is the right tool. There are times when the other is the right tool. There are times in which both are useful tools.

I don't know if the Digivue software supports it but put it behind another webpage that offers the name of a log-in account that is anon/anon then link it to the main Digivue page with login.

It depends on who's it is. It may be programed for a disconnect or it may be a memory leak, or just a straight up bug.

Is the camera hooked to a switch or a router? Most low end switches do not have any kind of routing built into them, so you would have to set up the PC to act as DHCP server.

Nope, I forget the ranges (Rory knows) but only those in the lower wavelengths are generally visable. It's why you can see most motion detectors from a distance at night.