Ed Brill

Post a Comment

1. 1  Dan the-technocrat.blogspot.com | 4/4/2006 1:04:52 PM

   cool! I could really use this in a helpdesk support role. How long until some saavy dev builds in some functionality here for tying into an asset records database.

   <Dan signs in to their desktop>

   "Ah, I see the problem, and it looks like another tech tried x 2 months ago. Let's try y..."

   very cool

1. 2  Rob McDonagh www.CaptainOblivious.com | 4/4/2006 1:10:23 PM

   Yes, very cool. ST75 is gonna be huge!

1. 3  Ross  | 4/4/2006 1:14:22 PM

   Ed, I noticed that there is a Jabber-Sametime gateway available ({ Link } but I was wondering why the sametime guys never ever completed the houri rfc (which expired in 2000).

1. 4  Chris Whisonant http://cwhisonant.blogspot.com | 4/4/2006 1:14:46 PM

   Yes, we get it... you're using Sametime 7.5 - enough rubbing it in! =) This is really exciting though. Keep the screenshots coming.

1. 5  Steven Joseph  | 4/4/2006 1:39:15 PM

   We keep waiting for ST screen/app sharing to get easy enough to use so it can be used for remote control help desk support. We've had it since 1.5 and it has been getting closer and closer, but there still (6.5x) can be basic browser security/config issues and various component/module download issues that you will need to contact ....you guess it... THE HelpDesk!!!!

   This looks better, but will we see all the ST components packaged into a optional single install so we can push all the critical tools/components out to our users so they don't have to download them piece meal as they start using more and more features? QuickPlace has this. Sametime and DWA should provide for this as well. Nothing worse that getting that call saying: "I can't get in... Was I supposed to click OK to the browser warning screen? It looks so much like all those pop-ups on the web and the help desk has told me never click OK on those."

1. 6  tonyo  | 4/4/2006 3:52:49 PM

   hey looks like netmeeting ! :)

1. 7  Giulio www.buzznotes.com.au | 4/5/2006 1:44:10 AM

   Ed,

   To use the modern Australian vernacular "It's fully sick!".

   { Link }

   Giulio

1. 8  Henning Heinz  | 4/5/2006 6:48:48 AM

   You made me curious. Is the screen sharing tool still directing all traffic through the server?

   I would love the main traffic going peer to peer and only session data being held on the server.

   If you have a central Sametime infrastructure and at a branch connected with limited bandwith, two people are sharing their desktops sitting next to each other, all traffic is directed through the main server. This is not a problem for IM but caused trouble with the screensharing tool (people complained that it was too slow).

   Athough this might be an advantage in security I would prefer at least an optional approach to support such configurations.

   I think at least one competitive product does it this way.

1. 9  Steven Joseph  | 4/5/2006 7:42:11 AM

   @8) Well, peer to peer would be a GREAT way to elimnate ST from a lot of US gov't accounts. There are a number of components of the ST server that can run on a very small piece of iron to eliminate the need to send traffic accross the WAN.

1. 10  Simon Barratt http://apps.fmc.com/blog.nsf | 4/5/2006 7:47:28 AM

   @6 Ah, but alas net Meeting, does not then go on to offer the ability to host a full web meeting, you then have to spin off to a hosted service on the Internet and pay as you go!

1. 11  Ed Brill www.edbrill.com | 4/5/2006 8:23:58 AM

   Answer -- directing traffic through the server. Sametime offerings manager Adam Gartenberg tells me that it is a standard e-meeting, loading only the screen share element (and not the other UI elements like participant lists etc). And it's fast. But no, not peer-to-peer.

1. 12  Diego Ogniben  | 4/5/2006 9:19:17 AM

   Very nice. Most interesting thing is however that 1Q07 in the slide for the Hannover client :) Almost time for a little beta?

1. 13  Chris Miller http://www.IdoNotes.com | 4/5/2006 9:59:31 AM

   Just to chide you like first graders, Edward R? When you hear someones whole name used it usually means they are in trouble.

1. 14  Don  | 4/6/2006 1:57:20 AM

   In response to the point made by Henning Heinz (comment 8), InstaColl ({ Link } adopts this hybrid model of routing the main traffic peer to peer (wherever possible) and maintaining the session data on the centralized server. I am sure there are other vendors with similar capabilities.

   InstaColl also already provides the "ad-hoc, on-deman escalation from text chat to webconferencing" capability - and not just through screen-sharing but data-level sharing of documents...

1. 15  Samuel deHuszar Allen  | 4/6/2006 12:27:24 PM

   Looks amazing! I'm currently evaluating a noMachine / FreeNX / VNC setup or possibly NetOp to do some helpdesk style stuff with various clients, but if I could get those capabilities through Notes/Sametime, that'd be ideal.

   Is there any info you can share on compression levels, what protocols are being used to share the desktop, and whether desktop and application sharing will be available cross-platform? I use Ubuntu for my workstation, but most of my clients are still suffering through Windows. It's sad to watch, but good for business. ;P

   Anyway, I would prefer a solution that has native hooks which I can more easily use in my custom Notes apps, and any info you can share or link to would be most appreciated.

   Thanks in advance.

1. 16  Henning Heinz  | 4/7/2006 2:08:27 AM

   To Steven(9),

   the screen sessions are not recorded at the server so I do not understand why this would concern US Government? I thought of avoiding the peer to peer phrase because this rings the alarm bells for some.

   To Don(14),

   I am aware that there are products that can do this (for sure Peter de Haas is going to rave about this) but that it not what I want/need.

   It looks nice though and thank you for the clarification.

1. 17  Konstantin Lessle  | 4/7/2006 8:35:26 AM

   Hello,

   we have one recurring problem with Lotus Sametime that my customers keep complaining about:

   When they share their screen with others, the button that needs to be pressed to take over control is not "visible" enough. People keep looking for that button without finding it. It should be red and flashing! :-)

   Kind regards from Germany,

   Konstantin Lessle

1. 18  Adam Gartenberg http://www.ibm.com/lotus/sametimefutureisinsight | 4/7/2006 10:30:49 AM

   @17 The "Allow control" and "Take control" buttons may not be flashing red, but I can assure you they'll be a lot more visible than today. I don't think we have images of that aspect posted that I can link to, but if you e-mail me I'd be glad to send you a screenshot.

1. 19  Steven Joseph  | 4/10/2006 1:18:44 PM

   @16: Yep, that Peer-to-Peer idea does throw up a lot of red flags. Primarily the focus is trying to ensure that public P2P technology is not being used to support sharing of computer files that contain music, digital film, TV shows or other information such that copying of the files may infringe on any copyrights or other associated intellectual property restrictions. Granted this would not include screen sharing per se, but we do have a tendecy to PANIC when folks say P2P.

1. 20  John Tapia  | 4/14/2006 4:42:54 PM

   I am wondering when this will be available or is there a beta sign up