Saw the HD video room onsite and is unbelievable, something this mkt needed for years. Approx three times better @ 384.
The phone is IP and PSTN with much better technology than we had….able to run in a tech room and not hear the fans or cell phones/blackberry on the table….

Ok, so they may have something:
“LifeSize engineers developed customized image-processing chips and the extensive software required both to handle the high-definition images and to make their equipment work with other conferencing gear. Most of the technical team at the 65-employee company is devoted to software development.”

Om can check his logs to see where I work, and it isn’t a videoconferencing company. I worked a long time ago on iVisit (www.ivisit.com), and I worked for a failed FTTH company, SandStream Communications, during the boom. This experience has taught me to be skeptical of claims where I don’t control the source video for testing.

Was the video talking heads? A largely static background with just some slight body movement compresses really well when compared to a more normal video stream. I am just having problems believing that they have made big advances in encoding technology versus the big researchers, particularly since they are trying to hire a ‘video team lead’ to handle H.264.

The ways to get their resolution over H.264 is to either reduce the update rate, resoluition, or assume that we are only doing talking heads - static backgrounds and moving heads.

Until you see their video quality at one mb/s, I wouldn’t buy the hype. Even professional H.264 encoders at NTSC resolutions output pretty bad video at 1 mb/s - I doubt they do better.