Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something simple to install, they could go public on the product. Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don?t mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it.
That's just disgusting!!!! If you want to run your phones on WindBlows use lync.... Should be plenty point and click easy for you.... On 12/04/2013 09:19 AM, CDR wrote:> Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid > version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, > something simple to install, they could go public on the product. > Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that > would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux > expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from > regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET > framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of > friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don?t mean another > slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I > would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20131204/d3afcdb8/attachment.html>
As per that theory 3CX should have been public by now !! Mitul On Dec 4, 2013 8:49 PM, "CDR" <venefax at gmail.com> wrote:> Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid > version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, > something simple to install, they could go public on the product. > Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that > would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux > expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from > regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET > framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of > friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don?t mean another > slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I > would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. > > -- > _____________________________________________________________________ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: > http://www.asterisk.org/hello > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20131204/37d5de61/attachment.html>
Asterisk is Open Source, any company can port Asterisk to Windows. Nobody
has. Personally, I don't want Digium taking valuable and limited
development resources to create a Windows port.
-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces
at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of CDR
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 10:19 AM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows
Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version of
Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something simple to
install, they could go public on the product.
Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do
exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but it
took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20
(RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET framework and Windows server 2012 are
miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don?t
mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I
would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it.
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to
Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs:
http://www.asterisk.org/hello
asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
I second that! Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID Eric Wieling <EWieling at nyigc.com> wrote:>Asterisk is Open Source, any company can port Asterisk to Windows. Nobody has. Personally, I don't want Digium taking valuable and limited development resources to create a Windows port. > >-----Original Message----- >From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of CDR >Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 10:19 AM >To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion >Subject: [asterisk-users] Asterisk on Windows > >Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, something simple to install, they could go public on the product. >Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don?t mean another slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. > >-- >_____________________________________________________________________ >-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: > http://www.asterisk.org/hello > >asterisk-users mailing list >To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > >-- >_____________________________________________________________________ >-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- >New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: > http://www.asterisk.org/hello > >asterisk-users mailing list >To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20131204/bedf7ba0/attachment.html>
On 13-12-04 10:19 AM, CDR wrote:> Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid > version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, > something simple to install, they could go public on the product. > Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that > would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux > expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from > regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET > framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of > friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don?t mean another > slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I > would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it. >Do you just sit around and think shit up to blame Digium all day? -- Paul Belanger | PolyBeacon, Inc. Jabber: paul.belanger at polybeacon.com | IRC: pabelanger (Freenode) Github: https://github.com/pabelanger | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pabelanger
On Wednesday 04 December 2013, CDR wrote:> Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid > version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, > something simple to install, they could go public on the product.Why would they? They already have it working well enough under Linux.> Linux has a very steep learning curve.Only if your brain has been damaged by Windows. People who have never used Windows before tend to get on fairly well with Linux when using it for the first time. And Asterisk has a *way* steeper learning curve than Linux.> A Windows application that > would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux > expert user, but it took me years to get here.Yes, it does. I've been using Linux since it was a curiosity on a single floppy disk, and I still have plenty to learn. But at least nobody is actively trying to conceal it from me.> And still, moving from > regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET > framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of > friendliness and on equal footing on performance.Depends what you mean by "friendliness". Human-readable configuration files that I can edit with vi if I have to are friendlier than a drag-and-drool interface, by some measurements.> I don?t mean another > slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I > would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it.Asterisk is Free software under the GPL. Anyone is welcome to package it for whatever platform they like. Nobody has bothered to do it because it's actually more effort to persuade Asterisk work on Windows' broken architecture, than it is to learn to use a Unix-like system. TL;DR: It's not our fault if you believe Microsoft's story that you're too stupid to use a real computer. It's certainly not our fault if you have let it come true. -- AJS Answers come *after* questions.
Probably feeding the trolls but here it goes. On 12/04/2013 04:19 PM, CDR wrote:> Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid > version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, > something simple to install, they could go public on the product.IIRC Microsoft no longer invests in the .Net framework which makes it a bad idea for a product that would live for up to 10 years. Do you really want to bet your business/company that .Net will be there in 5 to 10 years?> Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that > would do exactly the same would be a home run.I find Linux easier than Windows. Installing a package on Linux or Windows is not the issue. How is a simple 'yum install asterisk' any more difficult than double clicking on it in Windows? It's what you do afterwards with the OS and package. Asterisk has a much steeper learning curve than either. It's easy to mess up the config and suffer the consequences if the box is Internet facing. Also, Windows has a terrible reputation when it comes to security. Why would anyone want to use Windows for an Internet facing service? There's a reason that Google, Facebook, Twitter and pretty much the rest of the world are powered by Linux and it's not only because it's cheaper. Just because you find Windows easier does not make it a good idea.> Note: I am a Linux > expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from > regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck.There is probably a saying about people calling themselves experts and then complain about a move from EL6 to F20 which is puzzling by itself.> The .NET > framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of > friendliness and on equal footing on performance.I have yet to see a large Telco or ITSP deploy their services on Windows. A while back I have seen some attempts. It was hilarious to hear that the servers had to be restarted every few hours. Performance totally sucked, components would crash and the solution was, even by telco standards, ridiculously expensive. So no, they are not on equal footing when it comes to performance (and other aspects).> I don?t mean another > slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I > would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it.If you really want to use Windows then have a look at FreeSWITCH as it's available on Windows too. Then there is also Lync and 3CX. Good luck keeping your Windows boxes from getting hacked with all the financial and other damage it would cause. Regards, Patrick
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:19 AM, CDR <venefax at gmail.com> wrote:> Digium is 100% lost in the map. If they would come up with a Paid > version of Asterisk, one that would use the .NET framework in Windows, > something simple to install, they could go public on the product. > Linux has a very steep learning curve. A Windows application that > would do exactly the same would be a home run. Note: I am a Linux > expert user, but it took me years to get here. And still, moving from > regular RHEL 6.0 to Fedora 20 (RHEL 7) is a pain in the neck. The .NET > framework and Windows server 2012 are miles away in terms of > friendliness and on equal footing on performance. I don?t mean another > slow cygwin port, I man a native Asterisk for windows. In fact, I > would invest on the project if somebody wants to do it.Windows and Linux should be able to coexist. I have had great success setting up a VMware ESXi server with Windows VMs for AD and Exchange and Linux VMs for Asterisk and Web / FTP. Asterisk with Exchange UM for voicemail is a winning combination and works seamlessly. It is essentially a private cloud of the customer. Why not use the OS that works for the task at hand? Ryan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20131211/acb22fcf/attachment.html>