[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Voice Chat



On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 13:46 -0600, Jacob S wrote:

> hmm... Voice chat does sound more like a casual IM conversation, whereas
> VoIP makes me think of communication between computers and phone
> numbers, extra software and possibly even harder and most of all - $$$.
> But my goal here is just good sound quality and free; not any certain
> methods.

Understood :)

> According to skype.com, they do have a Linux client - and even .debs of
> it. I'll be looking into them further.

Go for that if you're comfortable with closed source. Their codecs
(audio quality vs. bandwidth usage) are said to be good, and the setup
should be easy. Points that come up now and again are that Skype comes
from the Kaaza founders, so it's not clear what to think about spyware,
and that third party calls might be routed through your machine eating
your bandwidth, which results from the way their network is set up. But
I have no details about that, and I think it need not prevent you from
trying it.

> Do you have any urls for 0$ tarif VoIP providers? (I'm sure I could
> google them, but that doesn't tell me what kind of experience Debian
> users have had with them, using which software, etc.)

Try FWD http://www.freeworlddialup.com/support/quick_start_guide and
directly sign up there if you don't want to use their softphone. You can
take any SIP client to use their service. IAX support is also available
(e.g. to use iaxcomm on Linux), but you might have to look around a
little for that.

Regarding other providers, I can give you some but that wouldn't help
you since I'm located in Switzerland, whereas you, I gather, are in the
US. You wouldn't want your packets travel the whole world, would you?

But look at www.voip-info.org, which unfortunately is currently down
(it is rarley though). It has extensive info on all VoIP aspects, and
also service provider lists. Just can't give you the direct link for
the reasons mentioned :)

Regards, Bruno.





Reply to: