Do your clients prefer: quality, longer or faster recording?

[rory 0]

lets see what your clients want..

[cctv_down_under 0]

Everyone wants, fast big pictures!

[rory 0]

Everyone wants, fast big pictures!

 

I know, i want a 40" Plasma with Crystal Clear Crisp Video, Real Time, and if in 3 months i want to view something from then, i want to view it 3 months later, in the same crisp real time image on that plasma - oh yeah, i want ti be able to see the persons wrinkles if they have any, yep, that clear

 

Hey, did you get to view the club yet?

[qman 0]

I know, i want a 40" Plasma with Crystal Clear Crisp Video, Real Time, and if in 3 months i want to view something from then, i want to view it 3 months later, in the same crisp real time image on that plasma - oh yeah, i want ti be able to see the persons wrinkles if they have any, yep, that clear

 

Hey, did you get to view the club yet?

 

 

And remember, I want it all as cheap as posible, even free if you could...

[cctv_down_under 0]

I tried to install your software, howver the first time it appeared to have a missing codec and I only got black pictures, then I tried the other one you recommended but it did not install cleanly and then it wrapped itself around my Sys32 files, which my system did not like at all. It crashed my computer and I had to do a system restore. I will admit though my system is a little different to most so it could just be me. Do they have simple webview yet?

[rory 0]

I tried to install your software, howver the first time it appeared to have a missing codec and I only got black pictures, then I tried the other one you recommended but it did not install cleanly and then it wrapped itself around my Sys32 files, which my system did not like at all. It crashed my computer and I had to do a system restore. I will admit though my system is a little different to most so it could just be me. Do they have simple webview yet?

 

hi, they dont. I made one but i took it off the web, wont br back on for a week or so.

 

Theyre software should work, im using it on a 600mhz windows me laptop with no issues. Ill let you know when the browser software is back up.

[qman 0]

Windows me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

 

 

See, I also have the luxury of holding a A+, MCSE, CCNET, and a Network + Certifications, so I I'm qualified to say..........

 

 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

 

 

[rory 0]

ME still is the best OS since 95, for speed. Like all windows OS's, tweaking is a must. I still dont know why everyone doesnt like ME, gives me less problems than 98 ever did, and is faster than XP (and way faster than NT and 2000). I have XP running on a few machines also, tweaked but still cant top the speed of the ME. I guess some people like having to install 50 security patches to XP, not me! )

 

Windows me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

 

 

See, I also have the luxury of holding a A+, MCSE, CCNET, and a Network + Certifications, so I I'm qualified to say..........

 

 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

 

 

[cctv_down_under 0]

I hold the same quals, not that paper quals mean anything at all, you are both right, less exploits with ME and it can be shelled very nicely, but it is not faster than XP not buy a long shot!

 

2000 is actually the fastest and 2000 server the most secure, that I have used anyhow. In my opinion ME was the worst OS ever written, but at least it doesnt get attacked every day!

 

Depends on the file system that you are using.. some DVr cards run OK on 98/ME but most will actually capture slower on those two OS.

[rory 0]

I hold the same quals, not that paper quals mean anything at all, you are both right, less exploits with ME and it can be shelled very nicely, but it is not faster than XP not buy a long shot!

 

2000 is actually the fastest and 2000 server the most secure, that I have used anyhow. In my opinion ME was the worst OS ever written, but at least it doesnt get attacked every day!

 

Depends on the file system that you are using.. some DVr cards run OK on 98/ME but most will actually capture slower on those two OS.

 

Ive installed XP and ME, on a ton of PCs, and XP is still much slower, by more than double. NOW, if you are running it on a 1.7+ Ghz CPU, then ok, anything will run fast, but running on 900Mhz and less, way slower than ME. 2000, the slowest ive seen yet (appart from NT), they hog memory like its going out of style.

 

Ofcourse i use my computers as web servers for writing code and testing it, and win me running PWS is soo much faster than testing on IIS on Xp or 2000. And graphic editing proggies is also faster in ME. XP would never run on this 600Mhz, 128MB Ram, 2GB HD, laptop i am using ME on right now.

 

Id like to run 95, the fastest ever other than DOS and linux etc, if these darn manufacturers hardware would support it! )

[cctv_down_under 0]

To be honest, most manufactorers of DVR cards actually dont support drivers for ME anymore. I would assume that if you were talking about DVR cards then you may have used the wrong drivers.

 

XP is designed to run on at least 256mb of ram so that would be your bottleneck, and yes if your not talking DVR then of course it will run faster on a lower spec PC, thats because ME was designed for lower spec PC's.

 

ME has so many bugs it is incredible and some very severe compatability issues, if indeed you are coding and multitasking I am surprised to hear that ME would out perform XP Pro. However XP was never designed to be run on a machine of that spec so If you are talking about other applications then I understand what you mean.

 

As for capture ratings, I have tested all O/S systems and have found very slow capture ratings with 98/ME, they actually drop frames, even on high end machines. 2000 is the fastest in the way of ability to set CPU tasking usage, and as mentioned many times before, there are many ways to set up XP to get rid of what I like to call the "Bloatware" that Microsoft put in there, as far as multimedia went ME was the forefront of the technology at the time but I dont see many people still using it, In fact when Bill Gates Released it (I think it was going to be called whisper or something), he did a demonstration and it crashed on him, kind of ironic really.

 

The problem you may be having is that XP requires at least 1.5Gb of FREE space and with only a 2Gb drive you would not have that!

 

Also XP if left to its own devices will indeed hog the memory, but this can be adjusted, to be honest there really has only been three O/S that Microsoft has released recently 98, NT and XP. Windows 2000 was just made to fix security problems in NT and ME was a rebundled 98 because they could not release what they wanted in time and it was a bit of a gap filler.

 

I am not a huge fan of any Windows O/S however I would have to say that XP Pro is the best if you have the hardware that it recommends, I apoligise if I miss understood you before I thought you were talking about capture rates.

 

Hope this has helped.

[rory 0]

Hi, no prob man, no i wouldnt hook up a PC DVR card on ME or 98. I dont have any bugs with ME from experience. But with new hardware I use XP because most are designed for XP now.

 

To be honest, most manufactorers of DVR cards actually dont support drivers for ME anymore. I would assume that if you were talking about DVR cards then you may have used the wrong drivers.

 

XP is designed to run on at least 256mb of ram so that would be your bottleneck, and yes if your not talking DVR then of course it will run faster on a lower spec PC, thats because ME was designed for lower spec PC's.

 

ME has so many bugs it is incredible and some very severe compatability issues, if indeed you are coding and multitasking I am surprised to hear that ME would out perform XP Pro. However XP was never designed to be run on a machine of that spec so If you are talking about other applications then I understand what you mean.

 

As for capture ratings, I have tested all O/S systems and have found very slow capture ratings with 98/ME, they actually drop frames, even on high end machines. 2000 is the fastest in the way of ability to set CPU tasking usage, and as mentioned many times before, there are many ways to set up XP to get rid of what I like to call the "Bloatware" that Microsoft put in there, as far as multimedia went ME was the forefront of the technology at the time but I dont see many people still using it, In fact when Bill Gates Released it (I think it was going to be called whisper or something), he did a demonstration and it crashed on him, kind of ironic really.

 

The problem you may be having is that XP requires at least 1.5Gb of FREE space and with only a 2Gb drive you would not have that!

 

Also XP if left to its own devices will indeed hog the memory, but this can be adjusted, to be honest there really has only been three O/S that Microsoft has released recently 98, NT and XP. Windows 2000 was just made to fix security problems in NT and ME was a rebundled 98 because they could not release what they wanted in time and it was a bit of a gap filler.

 

I am not a huge fan of any Windows O/S however I would have to say that XP Pro is the best if you have the hardware that it recommends, I apoligise if I miss understood you before I thought you were talking about capture rates.

 

Hope this has helped.

[brevardcam 0]

Quality & Service is #1.

 

If it breaks, they want it fixed now...which is completely understandable. I've won contracts because of references commenting on our service, and not because we were the lowest bidder.

[cctv_down_under 0]

That is a very true statement, the problem is that the consumer is not yet aware of the quality of certain brands yet. This means that the consumer does not necessarily know that your service or product is better and this is happening more often, but yes once again, if you do a good job and it does not break then you will get a good reference.

 

Hope this helped,