cricket

I don't think it will work. IE, Firefox, Chrome, Opera None of them supports RTSP.

Just took a quick look at the page. I don't think so. Apparently you can view and set password thru viewer port according to the post. The point is, what most users want is, only the authorized person can view the video. But the device is not doing any check on username/password, anyone can view the video thru the net. I've seen several DVRs and network cameras with a dummy login screen so this is no surprise. (some allow you to login by just hitting ESC)

Most of the people forget the existence of the cameras after just 10 minutes based on some research reports I read years ago.

Netcamcenter supports ONVIF http://www.webcamsoft.com/en/netcamctr.html you can try ONVIF first. It is easier to setup then RTSP. Many cameras have poor ONVIF implementation, so don't count on it to work. If not, you'll have to obtain RTSP url from the camera maker. And use RTSP to connect to the camera either using netcamcenter or other software that supports RTSP.

And pour some liquid nitrogen to create the same physical environment they use to run the software

Looks interesting. But I doubt the usability.

It should be able to FF faster than 2x in most cases. (up to 16x on Win7) When running WMP, right click on the video, enhancement, play speed. Note the max FF speed depends on the video file (codec/format)

The software supports RTSP, if you can view the camera by VLC, you should be able to use it with Netcamcenter. try RTSP/UDP with path: cam/realmonitor?channel=1&subtype=0&authbasic=YWRtaW46YWRtaW4= http://www.webcamsoft.com/en/netcamctr3_rtsp_device.html http://www.bahamassecurity.com/articles/dahua-rtsp-stream.asp#1 YWRtaW46YWRtaW4= (base64 encoding of admin:admin) is the default password, if you change the password, use base64encoder to generate yours http://www.base64encode.org/ The software can record in HD, both 720p and 1080p 30 fps.

The poweredge server price looks attractive. But you may want to double check on it. 1 Be aware a 2.4G Hz cpu today performs faster than an 2.4 GHz built 2 years ago. Modern CPU is more power efficient and run faster even at lower clock. Check out Tomshardware for CPU performance chart. 2 rackmount server usually are not designed for graphics. if you only need to record to hard drive this is ok. But if you also need to monitor the video, make sure you can add a display card. 3 I looked at the spec, it is DDR2 memory, not DDR3. 32 mbps isn't a lot for modern Intel processors. For 12 720p cameras, you can easily do it with Netcamcenter professional on an ivybridge i5. www.webcamsoft.com/en/netcamctr.html‎ The software is several times faster than other software we tried. With dual monitors, you probably don't even need a dedicate NVR.

In my impression, ONVIF has some motion detection stuffs defined. However, I would not count on it based on our experience with ONVIF devices. Just like you have "in theory" in the post. Spec is one thing, implementation is another. If the reason you asked about this is because cpu loading, you can try software that utilize GPU to do motion detection.

Good information! I would suggest adding netcamcenter professional (www.webcamsoft.com) to the video recording software list. It is not expensive compare to Milestone, exacqVision or Avigilon. Yet it has pretty good recording performance (we run the software with 16 1080p cameras, 30 fps each channel, cpu load is about 50% on an i5 processor.) and good multiple monitors support.

I think netcamcenter basic may work for you, user can use windows key + M to minimize all the cameras, and then use control center to restore the cameras. You can get trial version from http://www.webcamsoft.com/en/netcamctr.html

Could be the CCD/CMOS sensor need more light or time to grab an image. (common issue on low cost cameras) It is also possible that the processor not fast enough to encode MJPEG or MPEG4. Most likely you'll have to get a better camera for the job

You may want to try netcamcenter NVR software http://www.webcamsoft.com/en/netcamctr.html The output is ASF/WMV, not AVI. The upside is ASF supports video streaming. Playback ASF file on Windows should be no problem. For other platforms I think you can embed VLC plugin in the web page.

Video requires lots of processing power. To be efficient, software have to do many machine code optimization. Most of the software companies are not the size of microsoft, oracle, adobe. They will put their efforts on Intel platforms first. Don't assume companies that says nothing about Intel means they optimized for AMD. More likely is they just "assume" it will work as good on AMD. Most of the developers today have no experience with machine code. And they have no idea some 'surprises' could happen. "Intel" doesn't mean "Intel" cpu only. Intel chipset in general are also more efficient, faster and reliable. Another thing is, it may be because AMD based solution are more focused on cost, hence, the whole system are more likely to be assembled with cheap parts. I once had an AMD PC from a major PC maker died in just 3 months. Sure, it could be just bad luck, as my sample size isn't big enough. Not sure about the newer AMD CPUs. But last time I was shopping for a server. I noticed AMD CPU requires higher CPU fan speed. The chance of mechanical failure is much higher than electronics parts. (PSU, CPU fan are among the most common hardware failure) AMD is attractive in terms of price. But for things that have to run all the time like server, NVR, I would choose Intel based solution. Time is money too.