Could it be that Astlinux has everything you need and nothing you don't?

Mark

On Sun, 2006-05-28 at 07:08 +0200, Arne Gylseth wrote:
> Hello everybody !
>  
> I have carried out a number of test installations of Asterisk on
> different PC platforms.
>  
> My conclusion based on experience only is that Astlinux gives a
> quality of sound that is allways superior to Asterisk installed on a
> more complex Linux distros.
>  
> I have tried a number of Asterisk installations on Linux distros like
> SME server and Clarkconnect to see if it not could be practical and
> usable to run Asterisk just as an background process on a server,
> doing mainly something else. Asterisk installations has been done
> based on different versons of Asterisk sourcecode and some precomiled
> rpms.
>  
> My experience is the same all the time - If Asterisk is installed on
> a general server with a lot of processes running this allways lead to
> a reduced analog sound quality.
>  
> The way that I think the sound quality is reduced is that this more
> complex Linux distros tends to give Asterisk a some sort of "semi
> duplex caracter" - If the two persons are talking at the same time it
> tends to give some sort of "ultrashort pauses" that makes the analogue
> sound to "float not so nice and smoot as it should". The sound easyaly
> and usually sound like "poor digital sound quality".
>  
> Astlinux allways gives a "smooth and nice running analog sound"
> without any hearable degradation of the analogue signal.
>  
> I have tested different installations on the same hardware and with
> the same identical set of configuration files, and I think that the
> difference is there all the time.
>  
> One other thing that I have noticed is that the load on the processor
> is smaller when a telephone call is running via Astlinux compared with
> asterisk on a mor complex Linux distro. (Difficult to measure
> presicely but it looks like a difference something like 10:1 or 5:1,
> 0.9 % processor load for a call on SME server (a bit more than 100
> processes running), 0.1 % processor load on Astlinux on same hardware
> and same configuration files.)
>  
> I have lately been testing a bit on one AMD XP 1500 / 512MB pc with
> a standard Asterisk sourcecode installation on Clarkconnect and
> Astlinux on a HP Compaq T5000 thin client. It looks like that the
> Astlinux on the small thinklient outperformes the PC installation
> completely. (Its Astlinux version 3.0 because the thin client has only
> a 32 MB onboard memory.)
>  
> I find these observations allmost hard to believe. It is digital sound
> processing, and it should not behave like this, but it does (??)
>  
> I am courios to know - is this observations only my observations or my
> "believe" or is these observations that other Astlinuxusers
> also have done ?
>  
> If it should be like this, how could it then work like this, how could
> digital sound processed on one platform sound different from digital
> sound processed on another platform, when Asterisk configuration files
> and hardware is identical the same.
>  
> Still I ask myself - can this really be true ?
>  
>  
> Best reg Arne
> _______________________________________________
> Astlinux-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.kriscompanies.com/mailman/listinfo/astlinux-users
> 
> Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL 
> PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
Astlinux-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.kriscompanies.com/mailman/listinfo/astlinux-users

Donations to support AstLinux are graciously accepted via PayPal to [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]

Reply via email to