| Author |
Why does spigate send voicemail in .wav?
|
|
|
| Would it not make more sense for answerphone messages to be sent in low
bitrate MP3 instead of .wav which takes up loads more bandwidth? There
doesn't appear to be an option for this at sipgate. Ipersonally would
welcome low bitrate mp3 for the sending of voicemail to email addreseses.
| |
| Henry Hooray 2007-08-10, 7:11 am |
| "Tony" <00000@000.00> wrote in message
news:5i2pbfF3ksnvqU1@mid.individual.net...
> Would it not make more sense for answerphone messages to be sent in low
> bitrate MP3 instead of .wav which takes up loads more bandwidth? There
> doesn't appear to be an option for this at sipgate. Ipersonally would
> welcome low bitrate mp3 for the sending of voicemail to email addreseses.
You may be correct about the advantages of one format over another, but just
I'd pop in to say hat Voipfone also use .wav files.
Henry.
| |
| Ivor Jones 2007-08-10, 7:11 am |
| "Henry Hooray" <yri6tus02@sneakeLEAVETHISOUTmail.com> wrote
in message news:5i2psrF3n9v5fU1@mid.individual.net
: : "Tony" <00000@000.00> wrote in message
: : news:5i2pbfF3ksnvqU1@mid.individual.net...
: : : Would it not make more sense for answerphone messages
: : : to be sent in low bitrate MP3 instead of .wav which
: : : takes up loads more bandwidth? There doesn't appear
: : : to be an option for this at sipgate. Ipersonally
: : : would welcome low bitrate mp3 for the sending of
: : : voicemail to email addreseses.
: :
: : You may be correct about the advantages of one format
: : over another, but just I'd pop in to say hat Voipfone
: : also use .wav files.
Why not make the suggestion to them..?
Ivor
| |
| mymail@hotmail.com 2007-08-10, 7:11 am |
| On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:09:33 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>Why not make the suggestion to them..?
Why don't you seeing that you are their UK paid representative even
though you have denied this fact many times like you have denied
being a European.
| |
| Gordon Henderson 2007-08-10, 1:11 pm |
| In article <5i2pbfF3ksnvqU1@mid.individual.net>, Tony <00000@000.00> wrote:
>Would it not make more sense for answerphone messages to be sent in low
>bitrate MP3 instead of .wav which takes up loads more bandwidth? There
>doesn't appear to be an option for this at sipgate. Ipersonally would
>welcome low bitrate mp3 for the sending of voicemail to email addreseses.
It's probably because converting uLaw or aLaw which is the "native" voice
codec into WAV is virtually free in CPU cycle terms. Converting to mp3,
etc. is expensive, (more CPU cycles required - sometimes millions more)
and when you have the potential to be converting and storing 10's-1000's
a minute, you need as much CPU power as you possibly can get.
Gordon
| |
| Linus Surguy 2007-08-10, 1:11 pm |
| "Tony" <00000@000.00> wrote:
>Would it not make more sense for answerphone messages to be sent in low
>bitrate MP3 instead of .wav which takes up loads more bandwidth? There
>doesn't appear to be an option for this at sipgate. Ipersonally would
>welcome low bitrate mp3 for the sending of voicemail to email addreseses.
Actually, its much better to create a low bit rate .WAV file with GSM codec,
this will be more efficent than a .MP3. I'm sure this is what they are doing.
Linus
--
Linus Surguy - Magrathea Telecommunications Ltd. Wholesale and retail telephone
services. www.magrathea-telecom.co.uk www.uknumber.co.uk www.callthrough.co.uk
Looking for VoIP ? We're the largest wholesale numbering supplier in the UK!
| |
| Graham. 2007-08-10, 1:11 pm |
|
"Tony" <00000@000.00> wrote in message
news:5i2pbfF3ksnvqU1@mid.individual.net...
> Would it not make more sense for answerphone messages to be sent in low
> bitrate MP3 instead of .wav which takes up loads more bandwidth? There
> doesn't appear to be an option for this at sipgate. Ipersonally would
> welcome low bitrate mp3 for the sending of voicemail to email addreseses.
I would agree with you, especially on the occasions that I have had to
download them in a
hotel room via GPRS
--
Graham.
%Profound_observation%
| |
|
| Tony wrote:
> Would it not make more sense for answerphone messages to be sent in low
> bitrate MP3 instead of .wav which takes up loads more bandwidth? There
> doesn't appear to be an option for this at sipgate. Ipersonally would
> welcome low bitrate mp3 for the sending of voicemail to email addreseses.
..wav is only wrapper. Lots of different audio encoding types can fit
inside. Lots of them using less bandwidth than MP3.
Tim
| |
| Ivor Jones 2007-08-10, 1:11 pm |
| <mymail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:v0job3tgc154g476a4ja39juuren7krnmo@
4ax.com
: : On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:09:33 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
: : <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
: :
: :
: : : Why not make the suggestion to them..?
: :
: : Why don't you seeing that you are their UK paid
: : representative even though you have denied this fact
: : many times like you have denied being a European.
Put up or shut up, Ron. If you have *proof* that I am employed by Sipgate
then cite it here.
Otherwise STFU.
Ivor
| |
| Ian Pawson 2007-08-10, 1:11 pm |
| Tony wrote:
> Would it not make more sense for answerphone messages to be sent in low
> bitrate MP3 instead of .wav which takes up loads more bandwidth? There
> doesn't appear to be an option for this at sipgate. Ipersonally would
> welcome low bitrate mp3 for the sending of voicemail to email addreseses.
>
>
>
mp3 is a proprietary format and so has to be paid for, whereas wav is not
| |
| mymail@hotmail.com 2007-08-10, 7:11 pm |
| On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:39:07 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
><mymail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:v0job3tgc154g476a4ja39juuren7krnmo@
4ax.com
>: : On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:09:33 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
>: : <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>: :
>: :
>: : : Why not make the suggestion to them..?
>: :
>: : Why don't you seeing that you are their UK paid
>: : representative even though you have denied this fact
>: : many times like you have denied being a European.
>
>Put up or shut up, Ron. If you have *proof* that I am employed by Sipgate
>then cite it here.
Your continual praise and rebukes when someone says anything
derogatory regarding Sipgate is enough for me I suggest you ask your
Sipgate bosses to post here a statement saying you are not in their
employ .
Oh yes and I certainly will NOT SHUT UP if you do not like it bugger
of .
| |
| Ivor Jones 2007-08-11, 7:11 am |
|
<mymail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uocpb39i9gn8euv3pt0kukrog1b2ebsslv@
4ax.com
: : On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:39:07 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
: : <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
: :
: : : <mymail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
: : : news:v0job3tgc154g476a4ja39juuren7krnmo@
4ax.com
: : : : : On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:09:33 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
: : : : : <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
: : : : :
: : : : :
: : : : : : Why not make the suggestion to them..?
: : : : :
: : : : : Why don't you seeing that you are their UK paid
: : : : : representative even though you have denied this
: : : : : fact many times like you have denied being a
: : : : : European.
: : :
: : : Put up or shut up, Ron. If you have *proof* that I am
: : : employed by Sipgate then cite it here.
: :
: : Your continual praise and rebukes when someone says
: : anything derogatory regarding Sipgate is enough for me
: : I suggest you ask your Sipgate bosses to post here a
: : statement saying you are not in their employ .
Innocent until proven guilty, Ron. The onus is on you.
: : Oh yes and I certainly will NOT SHUT UP if you do not
: : like it bugger of .
If only you would.
Ivor
| |
| Henry Hooray 2007-08-11, 7:11 am |
| <mymail@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:v0job3tgc154g476a4ja39juuren7krnmo@
4ax.com...
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:09:33 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
> Why don't you seeing that you are their UK paid representative even
> though you have denied this fact many times like you have denied
> being a European.
Actually, he's not. And I know that for a fact.
Henry.
| |
| Henry Hooray 2007-08-11, 7:11 am |
| "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:5i2rr0F3nskh8U1@mid.individual.net...
> "Henry Hooray" <yri6tus02@sneakeLEAVETHISOUTmail.com> wrote
> in message news:5i2psrF3n9v5fU1@mid.individual.net : : "Tony"
> <00000@000.00> wrote in message
> : : news:5i2pbfF3ksnvqU1@mid.individual.net...
> : : : Would it not make more sense for answerphone messages
> : : : to be sent in low bitrate MP3 instead of .wav which
> : : : takes up loads more bandwidth? There doesn't appear
> : : : to be an option for this at sipgate. Ipersonally
> : : : would welcome low bitrate mp3 for the sending of
> : : : voicemail to email addreseses. : : : : You may be correct about the
> advantages of one format
> : : over another, but just I'd pop in to say hat Voipfone
> : : also use .wav files.
> Why not make the suggestion to them..?
> Ivor
Because I don't mind, Ivor. That's why. The point of my humble contribution
was two-fold: first, to inform the original poster that other VOIP suppliers
also use the .wav format, and secondly, to pre-empt our resident
you-know-who from having yet another meaningless dig at Sipgate.
Henry.
| |
|
| On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:33:26 GMT, Rona postulated:
>On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:09:33 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
><ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>
>Why don't you seeing that you are their UK paid representative even
>though you have denied this fact many times like you have denied
>being a European.
Why not take your handbag somewhere else, Rona, and bore the pants off
the old timers.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
| |
| Chris Davies 2007-08-15, 7:11 am |
| Tony <00000@000.00> wrote:
> Would it not make more sense for answerphone messages to be sent in low
> bitrate MP3 instead of .wav which takes up loads more bandwidth?
MP3 has licensing issues (costs) for encoding. You could of course use
OGG, which doesn't.
Chris
|
|
|
|