Why! Why!

[Guest]

Why is there that more or less no Software state what they really perform?

 

They say for instance; software support so and so many different camera brands/models, you can connect 4,8,16,32,64,128,1000 cameras.

 

But! They don't say anything how many frame rates in a given resolution and at a number of IP cameras connected! OK, 1000 cameras sounds great, but if you then don't get more then 1 frame a second it is useless!

 

There should be some kind of a matrix to tell these things!

Also all the security magazines are ****! They only write articles that are like a copy of the product leaflet from the manufacture! Not a real article where product have been critically tested!

 

These things tells me that many with money don't want the truth!

 

 

 

Anyone have any thoughts on these things?

 

 

JD

[cglaeser 0]

Anyone have any thoughts on these things?

 

This type of data is useful for the customer but generally identifies limitations of the product, and therefore does not increase sales.

 

Best,

Christopher

[Guest]

Anyone have any thoughts on these things?

 

This type of data is useful for the customer but generally identifies limitations of the product, and therefore does not increase sales.

 

Best,

Christopher

 

You are quite right!

 

 

This information is essential! But is still missing!

 

JD

[Soundy 1]

Probably because performance is more dependent on hardware than software?

 

The hardware part of the equation alone depends on processor speed, processor cores, memory bus speed, I/O bus speed, disk I/O speed, disk configuration... toss in operating system (in)efficiencies, and the matrix becomes unwieldy at best.

 

If you're talking IP cams, there's also the speed and bandwidth capabilities of the network itself... at this point, the matrix becomes impossibly huge.

 

Now factor in resolution, framerate, codec, and such camera-dependent factors, and the matrix is all but useless.

 

The limitations of software itself is pretty much a non-factor at this point.

[thewireguys 3]

Interesting question..... Most of the time for NVR software it is a limitation of the cameras, the server hardware and/or the network.

[Guest]

Probably because performance is more dependent on hardware than software?

 

The hardware part of the equation alone depends on processor speed, processor cores, memory bus speed, I/O bus speed, disk I/O speed, disk configuration... toss in operating system (in)efficiencies, and the matrix becomes unwieldy at best.

 

If you're talking IP cams, there's also the speed and bandwidth capabilities of the network itself... at this point, the matrix becomes impossibly huge.

 

Now factor in resolution, framerate, codec, and such camera-dependent factors, and the matrix is all but useless.

 

The limitations of software itself is pretty much a non-factor at this point.

 

But even the companies selling it as a total solution with the software/hardware dosent tell about the limitations!

 

If the security business was selling to end users, I am sure they would be sued due the marketing missing information!

 

JD

[Soundy 1]

Probably because performance is more dependent on hardware than software?

 

The hardware part of the equation alone depends on processor speed, processor cores, memory bus speed, I/O bus speed, disk I/O speed, disk configuration... toss in operating system (in)efficiencies, and the matrix becomes unwieldy at best.

 

If you're talking IP cams, there's also the speed and bandwidth capabilities of the network itself... at this point, the matrix becomes impossibly huge.

 

Now factor in resolution, framerate, codec, and such camera-dependent factors, and the matrix is all but useless.

 

The limitations of software itself is pretty much a non-factor at this point.

 

But even the companies selling it as a total solution with the software/hardware dosent tell about the limitations!

 

Because there's still a lot that's out of their control? I could put 1000 cameras on a P3 with a 10Mbit network and it would do just fine if I was using motion-detect to record a glacier in the Antarctic... the list of ifs/ands/buts would be a very thick book.

[Guest]

Probably because performance is more dependent on hardware than software?

 

The hardware part of the equation alone depends on processor speed, processor cores, memory bus speed, I/O bus speed, disk I/O speed, disk configuration... toss in operating system (in)efficiencies, and the matrix becomes unwieldy at best.

 

If you're talking IP cams, there's also the speed and bandwidth capabilities of the network itself... at this point, the matrix becomes impossibly huge.

 

Now factor in resolution, framerate, codec, and such camera-dependent factors, and the matrix is all but useless.

 

The limitations of software itself is pretty much a non-factor at this point.

 

But even the companies selling it as a total solution with the software/hardware dosent tell about the limitations!

 

Because there's still a lot that's out of their control? I could put 1000 cameras on a P3 with a 10Mbit network and it would do just fine if I was using motion-detect to record a glacier in the Antarctic... the list of ifs/ands/buts would be a very thick book.

 

Well then the industry should make a fixed testing/measurment enviroment so that you can compare!

 

JD

[Soundy 1]

Well then, invent one And then figure out how to get everyone to conform to it!

[ando 0]

This is a good and important question. I have seen some software manufacturers pushing their NVR specs over 10 000 channels! At the same time, they do not tell you how it could work in real life.

 

ACTi, for example, limits its NVR software purposely to 64 channels based on realistic consideration - assuming that all the channels are megapixel at maximum frame rate, then most newest available PCs in the market can support all the 64 channels.

 

As the computers specs advance year by year, ACTi will re-announce the number of maximum channels, for example 128. But as long as those high spec computers are too expensive for a customer, the 64 channel limit is kept to protect customer from bad investment resulting from misunderstanding.

 

Some manufacturers might set very high channel limits to their NVR in order to attract customers, but it is not clear to me how they are going to do the support for those customers who bought their product in good faith and then realize there is no actual physical solution today to make it work.

[jeromephone 6]

For me the number of total cameras is less of an issue that the number of different types of cameras a unit can handle. Why can't I mix canon,sony,actii, axis on the same server? i know many system allow a lot of cameras but everything else I plug into my network does not care what mfg it came from as long as it has a unique mac the network sees it.

[Guest]

This is a good and important question. I have seen some software manufacturers pushing their NVR specs over 10 000 channels! At the same time, they do not tell you how it could work in real life.

 

ACTi, for example, limits its NVR software purposely to 64 channels based on realistic consideration - assuming that all the channels are megapixel at maximum frame rate, then most newest available PCs in the market can support all the 64 channels.

 

As the computers specs advance year by year, ACTi will re-announce the number of maximum channels, for example 128. But as long as those high spec computers are too expensive for a customer, the 64 channel limit is kept to protect customer from bad investment resulting from misunderstanding.

 

Some manufacturers might set very high channel limits to their NVR in order to attract customers, but it is not clear to me how they are going to do the support for those customers who bought their product in good faith and then realize there is no actual physical solution today to make it work.

 

What PC's can support 64 channels with 2Megapixel resolution in good quality and at 25/30 PPS?

 

JD

[thewireguys 3]

For me the number of total cameras is less of an issue that the number of different types of cameras a unit can handle. Why can't I mix canon,sony,actii, axis on the same server? i know many system allow a lot of cameras but everything else I plug into my network does not care what mfg it came from as long as it has a unique mac the network sees it.

 

You have to use 3rd Party NVR software like Milestone, ONSSI, Exacq....... Software from a camera manufacture is only going to support their cameras.

[thewireguys 3]

This is a good and important question. I have seen some software manufacturers pushing their NVR specs over 10 000 channels! At the same time, they do not tell you how it could work in real life.

 

ACTi, for example, limits its NVR software purposely to 64 channels based on realistic consideration - assuming that all the channels are megapixel at maximum frame rate, then most newest available PCs in the market can support all the 64 channels.

 

As the computers specs advance year by year, ACTi will re-announce the number of maximum channels, for example 128. But as long as those high spec computers are too expensive for a customer, the 64 channel limit is kept to protect customer from bad investment resulting from misunderstanding.

 

Some manufacturers might set very high channel limits to their NVR in order to attract customers, but it is not clear to me how they are going to do the support for those customers who bought their product in good faith and then realize there is no actual physical solution today to make it work.

 

What PC's can support 64 channels with 2Megapixel resolution in good quality and at 25/30 PPS?

 

JD

 

The server will not be an issue..... the network will be the bottle neck

[ando 0]

This is a good and important question. I have seen some software manufacturers pushing their NVR specs over 10 000 channels! At the same time, they do not tell you how it could work in real life.

 

ACTi, for example, limits its NVR software purposely to 64 channels based on realistic consideration - assuming that all the channels are megapixel at maximum frame rate, then most newest available PCs in the market can support all the 64 channels.

 

As the computers specs advance year by year, ACTi will re-announce the number of maximum channels, for example 128. But as long as those high spec computers are too expensive for a customer, the 64 channel limit is kept to protect customer from bad investment resulting from misunderstanding.

 

Some manufacturers might set very high channel limits to their NVR in order to attract customers, but it is not clear to me how they are going to do the support for those customers who bought their product in good faith and then realize there is no actual physical solution today to make it work.

 

What PC's can support 64 channels with 2Megapixel resolution in good quality and at 25/30 PPS?

 

JD

 

It is another good question. There is a project solution design online tool called Project Planner at http://www.acti.com/project_planner/WEBSITE/pc.html

 

It provides recommended PC specs per every 16 channels up to 64 channels. It is calculated based on 1.3MP cameras which is ACTi standard today. If you have any proposals about what specs should be incuded there, please let us know, so that we can learn from you.