Any suggestions for a voice to voice peer program that will work on OS
9.2.2?

Basically I'm looking for something like AIM but with voice exchange
capabilities.

DMK

In article <sunclad-4EA599.06375306102004@news.verizon.net>,
"D. Kirkpatrick" <sunclad@sunclad.com> wrote:

> Any suggestions for a voice to voice peer program that will work on OS
> 9.2.2?

For those of us who are jargon-impaired, what is "voice peer to peer"?

(I'm guessing it's kind of a VOIP conference call?)

In article <siegman-E5FACE.08364306102004@news.stanford.edu>,
AES/newspost <siegman@stanford.edu> wrote:

> For those of us who are jargon-impaired, what is "voice peer to peer"?
>
> (I'm guessing it's kind of a VOIP conference call?)



Sorry if the terms were misleading.

Not VOIP, but rather a point-to-point program that allows the exchange
of voice.

As noted in the original, something like AIM but allowing voice
exchange either through a central server or point-to-point.

I believe that AIM itself and possibly Yahoo's program can do this
under OSX and for PC systems but I was wondering about a client for OS
9.

DMK

In article <sunclad-6E21AA.13015106102004@news.verizon.net>, D.
Kirkpatrick <sunclad@sunclad.com> wrote:

> In article <siegman-E5FACE.08364306102004@news.stanford.edu>,
> AES/newspost <siegman@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> > For those of us who are jargon-impaired, what is "voice peer to peer"?
> >
> > (I'm guessing it's kind of a VOIP conference call?)
>
>
>
> Sorry if the terms were misleading.
>
> Not VOIP, but rather a point-to-point program that allows the exchange
> of voice.

ummm... how does that differ from VOIP?
>
> As noted in the original, something like AIM but allowing voice
> exchange either through a central server or point-to-point.
>
> I believe that AIM itself and possibly Yahoo's program can do this
> under OSX and for PC systems but I was wondering about a client for OS
> 9.
>
> DMK

--
Sara

In article <071020042032006643%sarakirk@blueyonder.co.uk>,
Sara Kirk <sarakirk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> ummm... how does that differ from VOIP?



Ok maybe I'm not on the same page.

As I underatand it, VOIP is similar to a telephone call. Various
telephony companies will be offering this service sometime this year.
Some already are. Per my understanding its telephone by internet.

Now, what I am looking for is something that doe snot dial a number.

Instant Messenger but with voice exchange.

If that is VOIP, then OK. If not...

My apologies if my terminology is not up to par.

DMK

"D. Kirkpatrick" <sunclad@sunclad.com> wrote in message
news:sunclad-AECDE9.01323108102004@news.verizon.net...
> In article <071020042032006643%sarakirk@blueyonder.co.uk>,
> Sara Kirk <sarakirk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> ummm... how does that differ from VOIP?
>
>
>
> Ok maybe I'm not on the same page.
>
> As I underatand it, VOIP is similar to a telephone call. Various
> telephony companies will be offering this service sometime this year.
> Some already are. Per my understanding its telephone by internet.
>
> Now, what I am looking for is something that doe snot dial a number.
>
> Instant Messenger but with voice exchange.
>
> If that is VOIP, then OK. If not...
>
Yes, if voice is carried over the IP protocol then it is VoIP - whether you
do it through a telephone handset with the PTT supplying the VoIP
transparently, or through your own computer connected to the internet with
your software providing the VoIP protocol.


--
Obscurantism in an academic subject expands to fill the vacuum of its
intrinsic simplicity. - Dawkins' Law of the Conservation of Difficulty,
stated in 'A Devil's Chaplain'

In article <1097214271.Or66j+lvuTXL0huBpLMjNA@teranews>,
"Peter H.M. Brooks" <peter@new.co.za> wrote:

> Yes, if voice is carried over the IP protocol then it is VoIP - whether you
> do it through a telephone handset with the PTT supplying the VoIP
> transparently, or through your own computer connected to the internet with
> your software providing the VoIP protocol.



Thanks for the correction. I appreciate it.

Now, the original question.....

Anything for OS 9.2.2.?

DMK

On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 5:54:40 -0700, D. Kirkpatrick wrote
(in message <sunclad-5EF5A2.08544108102004@news.verizon.net>):

> In article <1097214271.Or66j+lvuTXL0huBpLMjNA@teranews>,
> "Peter H.M. Brooks" <peter@new.co.za> wrote:
>
>> Yes, if voice is carried over the IP protocol then it is VoIP - whether
>> you
>> do it through a telephone handset with the PTT supplying the VoIP
>> transparently, or through your own computer connected to the internet with
>> your software providing the VoIP protocol.
>
>
>
> Thanks for the correction. I appreciate it.
>
> Now, the original question.....
>
> Anything for OS 9.2.2.?
>
> DMK

I use KDX. I use it on OS 10 macs, but the website says OS 9 with carbon lib
1.3 will work. Free demos.

Works well, as long as you are up to configuring the networking issues if you
are behind a firewall. Which you should be. Bonus is that it will work on Mac
to Windows connections.

http://www.haxial.com/products/kdx/index2.html

Steve

In article <sunclad-5EF5A2.08544108102004@news.verizon.net>, D.
Kirkpatrick <sunclad@sunclad.com> wrote:

> In article <1097214271.Or66j+lvuTXL0huBpLMjNA@teranews>,
> "Peter H.M. Brooks" <peter@new.co.za> wrote:
>
> > Yes, if voice is carried over the IP protocol then it is VoIP - whether you
> > do it through a telephone handset with the PTT supplying the VoIP
> > transparently, or through your own computer connected to the internet with
> > your software providing the VoIP protocol.
>
>
>
> Thanks for the correction. I appreciate it.
>
> Now, the original question.....
>
> Anything for OS 9.2.2.?
>
Versiontracker lists something called Freewefone, but the feedback on
it is not good.

--
Sara

"AES/newspost" <siegman@stanford.edu> wrote in message
news:siegman-E5FACE.08364306102004@news.stanford.edu...
> In article <sunclad-4EA599.06375306102004@news.verizon.net>,
> "D. Kirkpatrick" <sunclad@sunclad.com> wrote:
>
>> Any suggestions for a voice to voice peer program that will work on OS
>> 9.2.2?
>
> For those of us who are jargon-impaired, what is "voice peer to peer"?
>
> (I'm guessing it's kind of a VOIP conference call?)
>
Peer-to-peer means the same set-up talking to the same set up. So in the
widest view, two people chatting over two tin cans connected by string would
be 'voice peer-to-peer' - just so long as they were using the same sort of
can.

So, if you talk from one computer to another this can be 'peer-to-peer' in
the sense that you aren't talking from a computer to a normal telephone -
you might not consider it 'peer-to-peer' if it was linux talking to MacOS if
you were interested in the software layers.

Of course, in the quite you mentioned above it wasn't saying 'voice
peer-to-peer', but 'voice-to-voice' peer - this would be something
different, a voice program that would, presumably, talk to other programs of
the same sort.

I'm not even sure that the question made sense, but it might have meant a
voice program that could act as a peer to particular standard of voice
program.

This is all to be differentiated from pier-to-pier communication which is
when the Blackpool pier chats to the Brighton pier. This is not very common,
even though I had somebody send me an e-mail the other day asking about
pier-to-pier communication.


--
It's not what I share but the way that I share it - That's all, brother,
that's all. - Mae West

>
> "AES/newspost" <siegman@stanford.edu> wrote in message
> news:siegman-E5FACE.08364306102004@news.stanford.edu...
>> In article <sunclad-4EA599.06375306102004@news.verizon.net>,
>> "D. Kirkpatrick" <sunclad@sunclad.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Any suggestions for a voice to voice peer program that will work on OS
>>> 9.2.2?
>>
>> For those of us who are jargon-impaired, what is "voice peer to peer"?
>>
>> (I'm guessing it's kind of a VOIP conference call?)
>>
> Peer-to-peer means the same set-up talking to the same set up. So in the
> widest view, two people chatting over two tin cans connected by string would
> be 'voice peer-to-peer' - just so long as they were using the same sort of
> can.
>
> So, if you talk from one computer to another this can be 'peer-to-peer' in
> the sense that you aren't talking from a computer to a normal telephone -
> you might not consider it 'peer-to-peer' if it was linux talking to MacOS if
> you were interested in the software layers.
>
> Of course, in the quite you mentioned above it wasn't saying 'voice
> peer-to-peer', but 'voice-to-voice' peer - this would be something
> different, a voice program that would, presumably, talk to other programs of
> the same sort.
>
> I'm not even sure that the question made sense, but it might have meant a
> voice program that could act as a peer to particular standard of voice
> program.
>
> This is all to be differentiated from pier-to-pier communication which is
> when the Blackpool pier chats to the Brighton pier. This is not very common,
> even though I had somebody send me an e-mail the other day asking about
> pier-to-pier communication.
>

Excuse me.?. but i'm afraid very little of the above is accurate
in any real sense of 'Peer to Peer communications'.
First of all, *Peer to Peer* is defined as DIRECT AND SOLE
communication between TWO INDIVIDUAL COMPUTERS.
This has absolutely nothing to do with what type of Operating System
nor what type of Hardware involved. Understand.???
For just one of many instances which illustrate the point
all one need do is to look at & understand the
*Gnuetella(formerly Napster) Network* -- a system which avails
millions at once a cyber link to swap files "Peer to Peer".

Now! ... about voice comminications using Peer to Peer.?
There are at least a handful of programs & apps that are
universally compatible for use by any PS User and any Mac Lover
by which to communicate "via voice/microphone" Peer to Peer.
But intrinsic to that Peer to Peer voice is using a program that
allows you to input your counterparts *I.P. Address* which
is relative to Your computer's exact phone number to DIAL.

Many of the Peer to Peer programs a FREEWARE*.
Try some searches at your favorite download archives & mirrors.

Mac will change your Life*
Deefii

In article <BD928A53.3DCE%deefii********.com>,
Deefii <deefii********.com> wrote:
>
>>
>
>Excuse me.?. but i'm afraid very little of the above is accurate
>in any real sense of 'Peer to Peer communications'.
> First of all, *Peer to Peer* is defined as DIRECT AND SOLE
>communication between TWO INDIVIDUAL COMPUTERS.

No, it isn't. Communication between two computers can be
client-server, or master-slave, as well as peer-to-peer. Peer-to-peer
implies that the two machines are equal in some sense.

> In article <BD928A53.3DCE%deefii********.com>,
> Deefii <deefii********.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>> Excuse me.?. but i'm afraid very little of the above is accurate
>> in any real sense of 'Peer to Peer communications'.
>> First of all, *Peer to Peer* is defined as DIRECT AND SOLE
>> communication between TWO INDIVIDUAL COMPUTERS.
>
> No, it isn't. Communication between two computers can be
> client-server, or master-slave, as well as peer-to-peer. Peer-to-peer
> implies that the two machines are equal in some sense.
>
Why make a fool of yourself.? *LOL* Do a little reseach, it's out there.
Or are you trying to tell everyone on Usenet that a "Server or Slave"
is not "..a individual (single) other computer".?

Peer to Peer whether to a Server/Slave/ or another Users
is ALWAYS* one-to-one. That's the bones definition of "P2P".
Peer to Peer implies that they are "equal acting to eachother"
[ ..that's, one box to another box -and vice/versa~ verse/vicé ..]
and AS PREV STATED- has nothing to do with hardware nor software.

Here's another hot tip too* -- when you see one of my posts
you'ld best do your homework before your insert foot in mouth again.

I'll tell the OP what isn't Peer to Peer....and that's when
ANY third(3rd) computer enters the mix of communications.
Most often that's when a "Server" is involved by a company
that is selling you "telephone switching service" to enable
what is often referred to as TELEPHONY.
This is rather a fallacy that by buying all this Telephony software
and buying/renting an expensive Telephony account, that you
have outwitted such as AT&T,,etc --and now have Phone communications
without having to submit to the Phone Companies(AT&T)
when the fact is ---- that you are STILL being routed back through
the "regular AT&T type phone system".

Is it any wonder that's not a popular option people choose.??.
Yeah... some real Phone Company genius is to thank for that.

This is why *Peer to Peer* ---the REAL THING is popular
and is considered a threat to ALL the communications companies.
But the genie is already out of that bottle.

*LOL*
Deefii

In article <BD92DD56.3DEC%deefii********.com>,
Deefii <deefii********.com> wrote:
>
>
>> In article <BD928A53.3DCE%deefii********.com>,
>> Deefii <deefii********.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Excuse me.?. but i'm afraid very little of the above is accurate
>>> in any real sense of 'Peer to Peer communications'.
>>> First of all, *Peer to Peer* is defined as DIRECT AND SOLE
>>> communication between TWO INDIVIDUAL COMPUTERS.
>>
>> No, it isn't. Communication between two computers can be
>> client-server, or master-slave, as well as peer-to-peer. Peer-to-peer
>> implies that the two machines are equal in some sense.
>>
>Why make a fool of yourself.?

Ahh. I see I have inadvertantly engaged myself in the sport of pig
mud-wrestling.

> In article <BD92DD56.3DEC%deefii********.com>,
> Deefii <deefii********.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> In article <BD928A53.3DCE%deefii********.com>,
>>> Deefii <deefii********.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Excuse me.?. but i'm afraid very little of the above is accurate
>>>> in any real sense of 'Peer to Peer communications'.
>>>> First of all, *Peer to Peer* is defined as DIRECT AND SOLE
>>>> communication between TWO INDIVIDUAL COMPUTERS.
>>>
>>> No, it isn't. Communication between two computers can be
>>> client-server, or master-slave, as well as peer-to-peer. Peer-to-peer
>>> implies that the two machines are equal in some sense.
>>>
>> Why make a fool of yourself.?
>
> Ahh. I see I have inadvertantly engaged myself in the sport of pig
> mud-wrestling.
>
...... Indeed,..
Next time you try to *correct someone that knows more than You*
you might first crawl out of "your Pigsty" so you don't have to
delete all the embarrassing text showing you as an idiot.

Deefii