Forums Feature Suggestions Voice andd Video Integration

Just curious if we where going to have a voice and video integration in the mIRC program...

If this has already been discussed my excuses i haven't found it

Yaze
'Chaos, panic and disorder, my work here is done... '

It has been suggested before, by myself and one or two others. I'd like to see something like this in the near future. I don't think it would be particularly easy to add though as it would operate a little bit like Netmeeting and that is an application in itself.

KVIRC has had DCC VOICE support for many years now, so I doubt that it is to hard to implement that. VIDEO may be harder, but since VOICE is already in existence, the documentation on how the protocol should function has already been written and all Khaled has to do is implement it.

Someone could just use the NetMeeting SDK and implement it rather easily i think.

Perhaps, but then you're going to be required to have NetMeeting and not everyone does, plus if mIRC does include voice chat I think it would be best for everyone if it did it in a way that is compatible with Kvirc.

I don't know how Kvirc intergrates voice support, but I feel if there's going to be voice support that there should be 2 methods.

1. Same As SOUND. For simple one-time (brief) voice messages to the channel or query. The person sending their voice issues a /VOICE [TARGET] command, at which point the client brings up a record dialog / begins recording. When finished recording, the client issues a CTCP (eg: VOICE IP PORT, or DCC VOICE IP PORT), or it could be 2 stage like SOUND with !Nick Requests.. then those interested simply connect to the sender and receive the .wav/mp3 file, which gets placed under a \voice folder or simply deleted after being played.

2. Same As CHAT. For voice conversations, one would want to set up a DCC CHAT which either has transparent CTCP VOICE commands sent over the chat whenever a party talks, or would open a new DCC connection where streaming voice is sent back and forth simultaneously.

In all honesty, I like Yahoo Msgr's implimentation of Video and Voice chat. They both seem to hug the median between latency and loss, providing a tolerable listening/viewing experience which uses little bandwidth and doesn't sound/look too bad.

- Raccoon

Kvirc has DCC VOICE setup as seperate from DCC CHAT.

I personally think this is a bit too much. I can imagine how slow the screen would update if the video support is being used! If you want video integration, use Netmeeting. That's what that program was designed to be used for. mIRC is a text based IRC client, and that's how I believe it should remain! I could easily live without this ever being implemented into mIRC, and I hope it never is.

I think many mIRC users are forgetting what mIRC is all about. mIRC was never intended as a voice/video client. It is intended as a text based IRC client. I don't understand why that's not good enough.

On a final note, I heard for a while that there is a dll out there that allows voice to be used over IRC. I don't know the name or where to locate it. Try looking on an mIRC scripting web site that carries dlls.

And you use mIRC without changing a single thing when installing it I suppose? If not then your argument is flawed from the start. Perhaps you should just open DOS and telnet to your favourite IRC server if all you want is a text based programme.

I cordially invite you to read this post because I don't really feel like repeating myself.

I never said I didn't change anything. I customize mIRC and use its scripting support as much as the next guy. You're putting words in my mouth. I just think video integration is a little extreme. Voice is not so bad, but video? C'mon!

The thing that ticks me off is how when some joker suggests the /splay command should play video files, his/her idea gets shot down. When someone suggests mIRC should have video integration similar to Netmeeting, everyone seems to agree.

I have MediaPlayer playing streaming video, it doesn't update the screen slowly, provided I have a good connection to the streaming server, the updating is near instantaneous. And mIRC is text based? Where do dcc sends fit into that? As has been shown by the sheer number of warez/mp3/movie questions on the forum, it is clear that people aren't using DCC sends primarily to transmit text files. If you feel you can live without this feature then here is what you do... don't use it.

How do you know this is what mIRC is "all about"? I don't recall seeing your name listed as the author. If text based chatting was all mIRC was about, numerous features in mIRC (/splay, dialogs, dcc send, sockets, picwindows, etc.) would not exist. So it is clear text based chatting is not what mIRC is "all about." I contend mIRC is designed as a chatting application, and we are simply expanding mIRC's definition of chatting from just text to voice and video as well. Oh and if everything given to us was "good enough" I assume you don't use a car right? Because until the car was invented people found horse drawn carriages to be "good enough." Everything is "good enough" until something better comes along. I have yet to ever see anyone, not just on this forum, argue that we should just accept what we have as "good enough" successfully. This is because it is simply a flawed argument.


Well you've just disagreed with your own argument. Remember how you went on about how mIRC is for "chatting"? How exactly does playing a movie in mIRC relate to chatting more than a video CHAT feature. You say mIRC should be about chatting, then when people say the same thing, you go on to say "well I don't get why people say mIRC should have more chatting features." You can't have it both ways, either you believe mIRC is geared toward chatting and therefore should be developed as such, or it isn't geared towards chatting. It can't be both.

Well, I wouldn't say that all advancements or improvements are better than those which are "good enough". Most things that are "good enough" tend to have less environmental impact than those which are suppose to improve and ease our lives. (Take the history of technology & pollution)

Of corse Voice and Video chat have very few negative qualities over Text chat. They DO however distract from intellectual conversation and encourage social patterns primarily based on sexual behavior, same as those we see in the dreaded RL. It's a lot easier talking to someone intellectually about a topic, even if they are hideous to look at or listen to, over plain text.

I can imagine if mIRC had Voice/Video integration, after a while it might become the norm for people to expect you to identify yourself by voice, just to make sure you are REALLY Male/Female or a matured adult and not a squeaky packet kiddy... before you can get opped or before you are taken seriously in a conversation. This has its advantages, but it takes away a level of privacy and escape, and distracts again from the flow of intellect and thought in words... allowing us to fall back on our common stereotypes that older people are naturally smarter and younger people are naturally ignorable, and leads way to racial stereotypes aswell.

Whenever you introduce something new into an environment, it's going to have some level of impact. Even /me and abbvs like LOL & ROFL and emote-icons have severely impacted the way we think and communicate in text today. I personally use :[b][/b]) a lot in chat, it enables me to express so many feelings and allows me to get away with saying things sarcastically while safely conveying that sarcasm. Perhaps I would chat more seriously/intelligently without them? But now I'm getting off topic.

I don't disagree with Xeno-ism. I believe it's always good to move slowly with any advancements, and test the waters before stirring things up that were "good enough".

- Raccoon

Well I personally doubt that will happen, at least not in the near future, for the simple reason that not everyone has a webcam/microphone. Also, if it were to happen with DCC voice/video, it could happen now. "Post a photo to www.mywebsite.com/ops-proof-pics.php with you holding a piece of paper with your nickname on it to prove you are really m/f".


Well this isn't exactly rapid pace. As I said, Kvirc has had it for years so this shows the system can work. Also I've never heard Kvirc users complain about voice chat, most of them love it and it is one of the reasons they chose Kvirc. So it's not something that will be thought of, written up, and implemented overnight, the process has already been going on for years.

"Post a photo to www.mywebsite.com/ops-proof-pics.php with you holding a piece of paper with your nickname on it to prove you are really m/f".

The difference with intergrated support is the user requires very little knowlege in such things as HTTP webhosting and FTP file uploading, and JPEG image compression... so too much time and setup is required to expect many people to comply. Granted, some cult channels may already require this of their members, but it's far from the norm just yet.

Not having a Webcam or Microphone would simply lead to not being allowed as an op, or allowed to join the conversation. We presently deny the same rights to people who don't have an ident. If mIRC didn't offer an IDENT daemon, there would be no discrimination, and servers would probably not even perform lookups today.

Well this isn't exactly rapid pace. As I said, Kvirc has had it for years so this shows the system can work.

Well, this is the first time I've ever heard of Kvirc. I'm sure that its userbase is relatively small, and localized to specific voice chat channels on specific networks.

You say you've never heard users complain about it, have you ever asked? Lets find a voice chat channel on Kvirc and monitor their social patterns. I bet in the first day, I will identify at LEAST one user being discriminatory at another because of a trait identified only by their voice and not the words they spoke. It's extremely common on Yahoo Msgr where Voice Chat is _most_ prominent today.

- Raccoon

Hmmmm, that reply gave me a 3rd degree burn! I was just voicing my opinion on what I think of this suggestion. I honestly don't like the idea at all. There was no need for a hostile reply.

I don't like the thought of mIRC becoming a Microsoft type product! I have to admit, voice support wouldn't be bad at all. I just don't think video support should be implemented into mIRC.

in a way i agree. I hope this is never added to mirc in any form whatsoever. In real life we judge people not by what they say but by what they wear who they pray to etc.. My whole reason for using irc in the beggining was to just chat with people without being discriminated against for some poor reason.

At first i thought letting people know i was female was no big deal. I found that irc (or at least a large portion of it) was male dominated and as such i sorta regressed into the male mode and never disclosed my gender (even when asked).

Now however i dont care what people think of me as far as gender wise im not trying to change people pov (even though it should be in many aspects).

On a different note i can see where the addition of video/voice could be entertaining perhaps between friends (I chat with several local people who already know me) but aside from that Personally i see no advantages. (good thing im not everyone ne?)

I don't judge people by the clothes they wear. That's the most ignorant thing I've ever heard.

Yea, it must be interesting being a woman on IRC. I know many who don't disclose their gender, and use neutral nicknames. (I'm still not 100% sure if Modoc is M/F)

I constantly witness "girls" (sometimes played by guys) get treated way differently in channels, and even opped within a weeks time (and then ask how modes work, and what it all means)... just because they're overly "heheh" and know how to flirt right. In these situations, I sometimes wish both sides had a webcam if only to break it up when they realize how unattractive they are to eachother.

I wouldn't say I'm strictly against Voice and Video chat over mIRC, I just don't think it's worth anyone's while to have it integrated. The technology is quite possible to do via DLL, and I understand Video has already been done via DLL... I believe this is where it should stay. The last thing we need are newbie users trying to talk on the mic and show their little dickies on their webcam to the rest of us. Let the experienced users show their dickies first at least, or even a boob or two... as experienced users aren't quite as obnoxious as newbs can be.

I have a webcam and like to use it like everyone else. I just dont want to see, and assist users with, integrated support (unless they're hot :tongue:).

- Raccoon

Prizm, that statement is a generalization of society at large, and not specifically targeted to you or I. If people didn't judge others by the cloths they wear, there would be no Gap or Baby Gap or Levis, etc. We would all be wearing Walmart and JC Penny (which I do) because they're more affordable.

I didn't put any words in your mouth. Note the question mark at the end of the sentence you refer to.

Voice is not so bad, but video? C'mon!

What's the difference? They are both non-text based functions and outside the intended use of IRC, but since CTCP and DCC are not part of IRC itself your argument holds no water at all.