If high-end systems are too expensive for your videoconferencing needs, and low-end setups just don’t do the job, here are a few solutions you’ll want to get face to face with.
When we last looked at videoconferencing almost 18 months ago, it was undergoing a resurgence as the technology finally caught up with the desired image and sound quality. Well, the quality has continued to improve, perhaps not in the leaps and bounds we have previously witnessed but improving nonetheless. Bandwidth available to companies to implement videoconferencing has improved and engineers and programmers continue to tweak the compression algorithms and processors resulting in better images than we witnessed during the last round of tests.
The high-end hardware is still not as simple to use as your toaster, but the low-end and mid-range equipment is tending more towards the “appliance” category in terms of installation, configuration, and use.
And given our current global circumstances the attraction of being able to carry out live, online video meetings with clients and colleagues at widely dispersed geographic locations is certainly compelling.
Even if your attitude to travel is not tainted by fear, the advantages of videoconferencing are still compelling. Urgent face-to-face meetings can be setup almost instantly, there is a reduction in travel time that obviously leads to an increase in productivity, and obviously travel costs are kept in check.
A question of bandwidth
When we last visited this subject, TCP/IP was the hot topic but few of the systems being installed actually ran over TCP/IP; the vast majority were ISDN. IP is now grabbing a larger chunk of the videoconferencing market as many companies are sinking a good deal of capital into improving their IP infrastructure. Admittedly ISDN is a point-to-point connection and so is inherently secure, while most IP connections to remote sites must venture warily through the unsecured Web. To overcome this lack of security, particularly if you are discussing trade secrets with a remote site, you can employ a VPN pipe and pump the data through this. Obviously if you are going over the very public Web you can at least improve your security but there is another pitfall and that is your connection bandwidth. ISDN is a guaranteed bandwidth, but over the Web there is no such guarantee so your experience will probably be quite variable.
|
Videoconferencing
Introduction 1. Polycom iPower 2. Polycom ViewStation 3. Tandberg 880 4. VTel Vista Pro 5. Zydacron Comstation Specifications Scenario AV Standards Glossary About RMIT |
We received a fairly broad range of products: from Polycom came the ViewStation FX system and the iPower 9000 with PowerCam Plus. From VPA Australia, we were sent a Vista Pro system and a Zydacron Comstation Z360 cardset. Tandberg sent us a Tandberg 880 system.
Installation of most of the units was relatively simple, although if cabling up your home theatre system was a chore for you then these systems may have you a bit worried. The ViewStation FX and Tandberg 880 are the simplest in this regard; they have the least number of rear connectors with which to confuse you. The Vista Pro is considerably more difficult—it consists of two units the main unit, a modified PC and a rack mountable patch panel unit that spawns most of the connectors; connections between the two units and then the outside world are quite complex.
The Z360, which is effectively a card set that can be installed in a PC, appears a tad more complex than it really is. The few ports at the rear feature “splitter” cables that have diverse functions. The iPower 9000 is not really more difficult to cable than the ViewStation FX, rather it features more expansion and connection capability than the ViewStation and thus appears a little more confusing. We should point out though that VPA Australia installs everything it sells so the end user need not install and configure the Vista Pro or the Z360.
Navigating the menus
Configuration of the units also varies in complexity, to some extent this is due to the structure of the menu systems themselves. For example, the Tandberg has a traditional-style menu system that anyone familiar with Windows will recognise, however, its organisation could be improved and navigating the levels and finding options is not as intuitive as it could be. The ViewStation FX on the other hand has a pictograph-based menu system with an English legend under each image, which—once you get the hang of it—is very easy to navigate through. Some of the pictographs are a little unconventional, however; for example, the symbol for “reset system” is a guy with a sledgehammer hitting the system. The iPower has a more traditional menu system, which while extensive, is also very easy to navigate; we actually preferred it to that of the Tandberg. The iPower also makes use of button bars, which are selected from the menu. The “control cameras” menu option, for example, launches a button bar that resembles a small remote control that enables the user to pan, zoom, and control local and remote cameras with relative ease.
The Vista Pro’s menu interface is rather strange—items are selected from a traditional menu and this launches a tool bar along the bottom quarter or so of the display. The controls are quite large and when compared to the other units tested appear less refined. We also found that the interface itself offers fewer options for tweaking the sessions and configuration than most of the other Videoconferencing units.
Although the Vista Pro and iPower are effectively highly customised PCs, their menu system and controls are not standard Windows analogues but are also customised and distinctly different. The Z360 on the other hand is a different story; the session is held in a standard window complete with Microsoft menus and button bars. Selecting menu items often launches a child window, which again adheres to standard Microsoft design.
Sight and sound
All five units featured cameras with motorised pan, tilt, and optical zoom—the Tandberg 880 and ViewStation have the cameras integrated into the main unit while the other three have independent cameras that can be conveniently positioned. Bear in mind that with the standard cables the cameras must be positioned relatively close to the system unit; the longest cable was the one that came with the iPower (around 2.5 metres) while the Z60 and Vista Pro’s camera cables were around 1.5 metres long.
Camera presets—the ability to predefine settings such as camera positions and zoom settings for individuals around the conference table—are a common feature. This works fine in most static situations where each member speaks in turn from a predetermined spot. However if the situation is not quite as static—someone displaying a large product or outlining a concept on a white board, for example—you may actually want to “follow” the action. The Polycom systems have multiple microphones located in an array around the camera and the system uses the audio from the mics to calculate the location of the speaker using triangulation. The ViewStation mics are integrated in the system unit while the iPower mic, the PowerCam Plus, looks like something out of War of the Worlds with three of the mics located on large curved booms and the fourth in the base of the unit, just above the IR sensors.
The Tandberg 880 relies on presets alone and does not feature audio tracking while the Vista Pro can be configured to do so with the addition of an optional Smartcam.
There is some intelligence in the tracking algorithms of the Polycoms, they will not desert the main speaker if someone at the table utters a word or two, but if they launch into a lengthy discourse the camera will turn and home in on them. All five systems feature separate omni-directional microphones and in most cases the cables are long enough to position the mic in the centre of a board table. The Viewstation mic is unique in that it has an integrated physical mute button, although all of the systems can easily be muted through the software.
Usability
Once installed and configured, all the units are relatively easy to use although we did find the iPower to be the simplest of the lot. As previously mentioned, the menu system is easier to navigate, but that is not the whole story—it’s more the tools available to navigate the menus. Most of the units make do with quite complex remote controls. Indeed should you choose to use a remote, the iPower ships with one, however it also ships with an IR wireless keyboard with integrated trackball and a row of dedicated function keys such as camera auto track, mute, near, and far, just to name a few. Navigating the menus and inputting data is an absolute dream using the keyboard and once the session is underway, the remote is fine for the less fiddly videoconferencing functions.
The Z360 runs a quite close second with its traditional Windows interface and standard PC keyboard and mouse, but without additional wireless devices it is not as convenient to operate with no standard remote control functionality.
The Vista Pro’s remote control is very large and boasts exceptional functionality as it is a clamshell design with the relatively standard remote layout on the top layer and a full Qwerty keyboard when the remote is opened. Until you become familiar with it the functions are a bit bewildering—the colour scheme and layout seem to detract rather than help the unit in terms of usability. The remote’s two-button mouse is usable with both button layouts and while the Qwerty keyboard does improve functionality the result is a fairly large and perhaps cumbersome unit. The menu system is also a tad Spartan, in terms of features, when compared to the other units tested.
We have no complaints operating the View-Station of the Tandberg although there are pluses and minuses on both sides. The ViewStation menu system is slightly more user friendly than the Tandberg but the remote control is a little too limited in terms of functions so you will be using the menus often. On the other hand the Tandberg has a more fully featured remote so while its menu system may not be as simple it does provide simpler access to many functions. Indeed is easier to access and find functions in a Tandberg videoconferencing session when compared to the ViewStation.
But what does all this really mean? Well if you can cope with the average VCR and PC then you should be able to confidently use any of these systems once the initial installation and configuration has been performed. So with very little training and familiarisation, any of your staff should be able to initiate and perform a basic session.
Calling a party to initiate the video-conference is a simple matter of typing in the ISDN number or IP address but if this is too hard, someone in the know can input the numbers into an address book and users can simply place a call via a name rather than number.
Overall quality
Picture in Picture (PIP) is standard on all the systems. This can be configured to show your local and remote view with the former in the small PIP window, however a second monitor can be added to the systems and dedicated to local and far views. It is worth noting that the session can only be viewed on an NTSC or PAL monitor. In the case of the Tandberg 880 and ViewStation FX, there are VGA connectors for the second monitor to enable display of content. The remaining three systems can display the session on a regular PC monitor and while all are capable of transmitting and receiving true content only the iPower, ViewStation, and Tandberg 880 are capable of displaying the content at the true PC XGA 1024 x 768 resolution. The Z360 and Vista Pro must down convert unless they can negotiate a 16CIF feed with the originator which will scale the XGA to 1408 x 1152.
All the units had at least a composite output that can feed a VCR so the entire session can be recorded for archival or training purposes.
Image quality was quite variable across the systems tested; all were capable of at least 384Kbps across IP, the iPower for example could be configured for 4000Kbps providing you have the available bandwidth to spare.
We tested each of the units at 384Kbps and the results were at times surprising. Lighting in our Lab was not what one would call optimal but it was at least as good as many of the boardrooms we have seen so it was surprising to see how the various cameras coped with the lighting when set to auto exposure control.
The iPower, Vista Pro, and Tandberg were very good under adverse lighting and of the three the Vista Pro is arguably the best, the ViewStation was also very good and the Z360 the worst of the group, although we still consider its performance to be quite good.
As far as overall display quality during a session the nod must go to the Vista Pro; the image quality was gorgeous with the smoothest display of the lot when rendering movement and surprisingly rich colour and well-balanced contrast. When challenged with rapidly moving objects the Vista Pro was also less likely to display blank or confused scan lines in the rapidly changing portion of the image, the Tandberg was second best in this regard followed by the two Polycoms. The Z360 did not handle motion as well as the other units with marked break-up of the image but we were being a bit harsh in that during your average VC session the movement is quite limited and the Z360 would cope quite well.
