OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum

OS2 World.Com Bounty System => Open Bounties => Topic started by: miturbide on 2007.05.17, 04:53:28

Title: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: miturbide on 2007.05.17, 04:53:28

Supporting thread for the Universal Webcam drivers (http://www.os2world.com/content/view/335/71/) bounty. The original and old bounty thread can be found
here (http://www.os2world.com/cgi-bin/ultraboard/UltraBoard.cgi?action=Read&BID=83&TID=26&SID=).


Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: miturbide on 2007.07.28, 20:15:32

I think that this bounty should have some list of webcams that we will like to see working under OS/2-eCs. Possible the "Universal Webcam Driver" is to broad and general.

Possible it should be a port of the " Linux kernel webcams Driver GSPCA / SPCA5xx". (http://mxhaard.free.fr/spca5xx.html)
It have several webcam listed.

what do the sponsors think about it ?
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: djcaetano on 2009.09.22, 01:38:51
Quote from: miturbide on 2007.07.28, 20:15:32

I think that this bounty should have some list of webcams that we will like to see working under OS/2-eCs. Possible the "Universal Webcam Driver" is to broad and general.

Possible it should be a port of the " Linux kernel webcams Driver GSPCA / SPCA5xx". (http://mxhaard.free.fr/spca5xx.html)
It have several webcam listed.

what do the sponsors think about it ?

  I am not a sponsor (yet), but I think your comment do make sense.
I do not even believe it is possible to do an universal WebCam driver, since
there are so many chipsets. Besides, this driver you pointed out support
many common webcam devices.

  Regards.
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: rwklein on 2009.09.22, 15:56:00
Kewl webcam drivers again. I remeber being at one of the first Netlabs developer workshops and Vladest (author of Warvision) had a  driver. And he had a kewl app, but he could look at him self.

Its good you guys bring up the topic again. But in all discussions I always miss one thing.
What about the application to use the webcam with ? From my point of view Mercury messanger is the best bet.
Its written in java http://mercury.im/ I run it from time to time.

It has an interface that somehow with quicktime can accept video input. You can already view webcam feeds with it, just not send.
http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=205592 I found this discussion. Don't know what is needed for this. It would require of course some OS/2 specific code.

There is already a webcam driver for OS/2 I think somewhere on Netlabs...

A webcam that only sends its data to the screen is nice, but only if you want have confirmed the whole day how handsome you look :-)

Roderick
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: warpcafe on 2009.09.22, 16:00:20
Hi,

I found a platform-independant alternative here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror)
Okay, sorry. I know that was not quite productive... yet, I simply couldn't resist...

Cheers,
Thomas
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: miturbide on 2009.09.22, 17:14:09
haha, good one Thomas.

But about the webcam, the driver it is important and the application too. But It should start somewhere.  What was the status of the webcam drivers on netlabs ? does anybody test it ? is it complete open source, can it work as a start for this ?
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: rwklein on 2009.09.22, 18:40:24
The sources might be in the Warpvision repository:

For binary package:
http://www.os2world.com/content/view/2526/48/

I think I read somewhere Paul Smedley stated (somebody quoted him) that the sources are not realy usefull...

Roderick
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: Paul Smedley on 2009.09.23, 06:02:34
Quote from: rwklein on 2009.09.22, 18:40:24
The sources might be in the Warpvision repository:

For binary package:
http://www.os2world.com/content/view/2526/48/

I think I read somewhere Paul Smedley stated (somebody quoted him) that the sources are not realy usefull...


I don't remember commenting on this - but I maybe I just forget commenting :P
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: onlineuser2 on 2009.09.23, 10:53:42
I think a webcam driver  +  internet dialog sw are absolutely needed!

As much as I am concerned: I am only one of the sponsor and I agree with having a listed webcam driver.

I suppose  that the other bounty sponsors for "universal" driver will agree too.

Surely if somebody will announce any possible good results about the bounty, the amount will increase with other sponsors (as it happened in the past).

The need of thinking together the webcam and apps sounds reasonable.

It doesn't matter for the users if  it is Mercury or other ones (by qt4 ?), the point is getting communication + audio + webcam. The question is up to the programmers.



Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: rwklein on 2009.09.23, 12:25:55
Quote from: Paul Smedley on 2009.09.23, 06:02:34
Quote from: rwklein on 2009.09.22, 18:40:24
The sources might be in the Warpvision repository:

For binary package:
http://www.os2world.com/content/view/2526/48/

I think I read somewhere Paul Smedley stated (somebody quoted him) that the sources are not realy usefull...


I don't remember commenting on this - but I maybe I just forget commenting :P

Oooh darn I should have been more carefull writing something like this.

This thread, somebody might have mis quoted you.

http://osdir.com/ml/org.netlabs.warpvision.general/2007-06/msg00010.html

Roderick
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: rwklein on 2009.09.23, 12:38:18
Quote from: onlineuser2 on 2009.09.23, 10:53:42
The need of thinking together the webcam and apps sounds reasonable.

It doesn't matter for the users if  it is Mercury or other ones (by qt4 ?), the point is getting communication + audio + webcam. The question is up to the programmers.

Keep an eye on the requirementlist, without thinking about hand in hand a bounty for a webcam driver and application is pretty useless unless you want a digital mirror... Like Warpcafe wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror

Think very well about it that we have multiple messanger protocols like America Online (still around ?), Yahoo Messenger, ICQ, MSN. I'm did not do research to find an application that could support these mayor chat protocols, is cross platform (so hopefully easy portable to Os/2) and would support webcams as well.

Something to realy consider is that such a client in some cases requires maintance. Then its better to take for example a platform neutral client as Mercury messanger (for MSN).

It would not be good old Microsoft again if they would not modify the MSN protocol. Look on http://mercury.im/
At the top of the page: "You are logged out because there was a problem with the connection with the MSN server' bug just after signin. Mercury 1.9.5 and Mercury 2.0 RC1 have been released to fix this."

Thats an example of needing somebody todo maintainance on the client.

Roderick
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: Saijin_Naib on 2009.09.23, 18:25:36
AIM is still huge, mostly in the US and Canada. MSN seems bigger in Europe/Asia, ICQ also is bigger in europe. Yahoo seems to also be Asia as well predominantly.

There are some multiprotocol IM clients (Pidgin, Digsby) come to mind. Digsby uses Wxwidgets and Webkit (it was created by some kids at my school!). I've contacted them before about starting an OS/2 port but they straight up ignored me. Maybe if someone with more authority from here contacted them...

AIM has opened their program/protocol a lot to developers now.
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: miturbide on 2009.09.24, 04:57:52

The thread about the webcam driver from warpvision is quite hard to follow.

What happened to the source code? and who developed it ?
Does it work ? does anybody tested it with the webcams listed ?

Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: EugeneGorbunoff on 2009.09.24, 09:53:10
The control program + modified USB drivers were developed by Vit for company selling ATM solutions: http://www.ssi.com.ua/wwwssi.nsf/compage/65?OpenDocument

supported hardware: Logitech QuickCam 4000 Pro + compatible

source code: I don't know is it available or not
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: miturbide on 2009.09.24, 16:13:25
Eugene, whichis the complete name of Vit ?
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: miturbide on 2009.09.24, 16:27:50
About the application.

Has anybody tested out on other platforms QuteCom (previusly known as OpenWengo)?  It seems to support video but I haven't try it out. As far as I know OpenWengo needed QT4 to be ported first, not sure if QuteCom is also on the QT4 path (possible yes). But since there is some work done with the QT4 ports, possible QuteCom can be the more closed to be ported to eCS-OS2

By the way, tere is an ongoing bounty for OpenWengo (http://www.os2world.com/content/view/339/71/) (QuteCom). If you want to read the forum thread.
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: diver on 2009.09.24, 18:52:50
yes Qutecom is also using Qt4. we consider to port that, as i wrote in the openwengo thread.

but to be honest if we also include a webcam is not known at this point.
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: miturbide on 2009.09.24, 20:50:25

Hi Diver, sure , it is not time to talk about the webcam support for it as a short term project, but it is possibility for the future.
Title: Re: Universal Webcam drivers
Post by: onlineuser2 on 2009.09.28, 13:09:46
On the one hand:

Eugene Gorbunoff  told  of
Logitech QuickCam 4000 Pro + compatible as supported webcams.

Win Brun uses sonix usb cameras: http://home.hccnet.nl/w.m.brul/sonixcam
see also hobbes

on the other hand:

Mercury and other apps (usb cam compatible) are working  (but without cam)

QuteCom is not so far

It may be other qt4 communication apps exist

Anybody is able to  prepare an os/2 communication application (Messenger-like) using few listed webcams? 

If it is so hard we will wait and see. If it is not too difficult somebody may give notice of  his effort. In that case we can ask the similar-bounty-sponsors to re-address their aims (our site master must have the mail-address they used to subscribe). Moreover we may launch a dedicated and defined bounty, if useful. In any case we have to rely on programmers-friends' os/2-sake.

ps. Sometime we forgot the "end user in the street".  When you present somebody our os/2-ecs the questions to begin with are: writing? yes, browsing? yes, e-mail? yes, multimediaplaying? yes burning cd-rom and dvd? yes usb storage? yes, java? sufficiently, flash? it's forthcoming in very next days, webcam and voice internet communicating? no

This is the lack which stops conversation! and it avoids a larger spreading of os/2 test and use by potentially interested people.