search for: 79c9

Hi people Just wondered what your thoughts are on Microsoft's RTAudio codec that they use in their Unified Communications stuff: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=5D79B584-79C9-42A8-90C4-4AB3F03D19C4&displaylang=en They let people license it to use in their own products. I couldn't find any sample clips of RTAudio encoded speech. Apart from being $35000 less expensive, does anyone have any other reasons as to why Speex is better? -Thom -------------- next part...

> Just wondered what your thoughts are on Microsoft's RTAudio codec > that they use in their Unified Communications stuff: > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=5D79B584-79C9-42A8-90C4-4AB3F03D19C4&displaylang=en The document is interesting... So it took them 6 years to come up with a codec that has almost the same structure as Speex (sub-band CELP -- can't tell what codebooks they're using), almost 1/5 of the modes supported and $35,000 more expensive. Loo...

...business experience! At 09:38 PM 8/31/2007 +1000, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > > Just wondered what your thoughts are on Microsoft's RTAudio codec > > that they use in their Unified Communications stuff: > > > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=5D79B584-79C9-42A8-90C4-4AB3F03D19C4&displaylang=en > >The document is interesting... So it took them 6 years to come up with a >codec that has almost the same structure as Speex (sub-band CELP -- >can't tell what codebooks they're using), almost 1/5 of the modes >supported and $35,000...