Forums Feature Suggestions Webcam

Hi guys,

Khaled could add one webcam module on mIRC. This would be veryyy good, a lot of ppl go to msn cuz mIRC doesnt have webcam.

You can bet with me, mIRC with webcam would be the best ever, no more msn/aim

Maybe webcam in DCC Chat or a new window. No problem. Just add webcam to mIRC and we will see.

Please mIRC staff and Khaled add webcam to mIRC, The IRC users will be pleased forever with this.

Best,
Debug

Webcams/Voice chats has been suggested many times before, use the Search feature, expand to 'All Forums' and 'All Posts' for best results, and you'll find plenty of posts discussing it.

Regards,

I, for one, wouldn't be pleased if this was added. It would just bring a new generation of people into public chatrooms and sending out private messages asking random people if they have a webcam, which is very annoying.

In my opinion, mIRC should stay away from anything webcam related, it's fine just the way it is.

i agree, mirc was always text based chat program and it would be fair to stay like this...
but if author would be smart he would add web cam coz it would bring more users to use mirc and therefore he would get more money (exept from those who use keygens)

You don't really care about Khaled getting more money, you just want to see webcam added in mirc. If somebody would ask me, I would say that it's a bad idea, becouse mirc is irc client (irc is internet relay chat) and irc doesn't support webcams, so why would mirc do that?

this is what dlls are for

read my post AGAIN
THINK
THEN comment it

Just call me thick.

Can you please explain (in a balanced business case) why adding WebCam support would bring more users to mIRC?

As part of that explanation, can you please address the increased bandwidth usage, privacy concerns and software blaot that comes with such an issue, and how these negatives are outweighed by the advantages you foresee?

Thanks,

DK

"Can you please explain (in a balanced business case) why adding WebCam support would bring more users to mIRC?"

because todays kids want that ?
because for same reason todays kids use msn more than mirc ?

'Today's kids' use MSN more than any other IRC/IM client because it's basically forced upon them by Microsoft. They don't have to download anything, they don't have to learn how to use it, all they do is sign up and they're set.

IRC clients tend to require a basic knowledge in IRC or the client itself and other IM clients like Yahoo! Messenger have to be downloaded.

In my opinion it has nothing to do with functionality, but convenience.

It doesn't have to be supported in IRC. There's a DCC VIDEO protocol already in existence, there's no reason it shouldn't be supported.

Today's kids want webcam in mIRC? Well you haven't consulted with my kids.

In my opinion webcams would take away not add to the quality of mIRC. Besides the lag that a webcam would add to your miRC, there's no longer the element of *imagination* in thinking on how someone looks like. Most people don't even concern themselves with that. All they want are good conversations between IRC friends.

Just my 2 cents worth,

Talea

- Didn't you just make the same kind of assumptions about "most people" that Debug made about "today's kids"?

I don't see why support for DCC VIDEO would cause mIRC to lag. It's not like you'd immediately have a video connection with everyone on IRC. It would be no different from any other form of DCC - someone has to specifically request a session and the recipient can either accept or decline. For someone like yourself (or myself for that matter) who didn't want to use it, you'd never have to.

What MSNM have that mIRC doesnt have? Sound and Webcam.

mIRC with sound and webcam , I am sure that this will bring more users. Why?

For chat, mIRC is better than MSNM.
To make new friends, mIRC is better than MSNM.
To have support, mIRC is better than MSNM.
To have support in one program, mIRC is better than MSNM.
To chat with Sound and Webcam, MSNM is better than mIRC.

Need more?

Why are you sure that adding webcam will bring more users?

Changing something in the environment (e.g. adding WebCam) changes the dynamics, so the benefits of the change need to outweight the downsides (previously listed).

In addition, we need to be careful not to confuse IRC with other messaging media, anymore than we should not confuse a word processor with a spreadsheet.

By requesting that WebCam be added to mIRC, you are implicitly requesting that IRC include support for streaming video and sound.

If you want to use other protocols to support this "sight and sound extravaganza", then would it not be simpler to run another application (already optimised for this) next to your instance of mIRC?

Cheers,

DK

By requesting that WebCam be added to mIRC, you are implicitly requesting that IRC include support for streaming video and sound.

And Why Google added "1GB email"? Why Microsoft added the "msn messenger"? Why Altavista added "online traslator"? Why Mozilla added "mail client" and "irc client"? The most famous programs/companies left their "primary views" and created other views.

Just to have more users and open the features that they have. Why mIRC cant do this? There isnt nothing to lose with this. Only win!

amen !

Let's take a look at the 'downsides' we've had so far shall we?

• Video support will hurt mIRC as a text chat client.
  - Why? The two are not mutually exclusive.
• I don't want mIRC to become an instant messenger.
  - That's fair enough in some respects, but that doesn't mean that every suggestion for mIRC that already exists in an IM is immediately going to transform mIRC into one. Look at the suggestion objectively and stop worrying about where it came from.
• What about added bandwidth?
  - Added bandwidth to who? The video stream would be over DCC so IRC servers would not be affected one bit. As for the clients, well, if you don't want the extra bandwidth use then just don't accept DCC VIDEO requests.
• What about privacy?
  - What about it? How is video chat any more of a privacy concern than text chat?
• What about software bloat?
  - You don't know there'll be software bloat and I don't know that there won't. It's pointless for us to argue about it because we'd just be guessing. All we can do is talk about the actual feature suggestion and let Khaled worry about implementation details and whether it's worthwhile.
• People will confuse mIRC with other messaging media.
  - I have no idea what the hell that means. But nonetheless DCC VIDEO and SOUND protocols already exist and have already been implemented in some IRC clients, so I don't see how mIRC supporting what's already available and in use on IRC will make it appear as less of an IRC client.

Bottome line: I don't care if DCC VIDEO brings more users. I don't particularly care whether DCC VIDEO is supported or not since I'll probably never use it myself, but so far not one person has given what I would consider a reasonable argument against it.

I really don't see any reason to add it.

Edit: Except maybe becouse of few people here who likes webcam. But then again, they have hundred of programs that they can use for webcam chat, so why changing mirc when some of us likes it the way it is.

Can we all just agree that some people want it, some don't, and that nobody is going to come up with some super-convincing argument that hasn't already been used a hundred times, and LET THIS THREAD DIE? If Khaled wants it, it will be there. Reading the same thing restated a dozen times tires me. </tirade>