Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

vors.stargrave.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 77 posts

Re: VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

#61

Post by Gormo »

aftbit wrote: post #45
account42 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is simply not true. As someone who has been gaming exclusively on Linux for over a decade I don't even bother checking for support before getting new games anymore because almost all of them just work with Wine/Proton or only need minor workarounds. The only things that do give problems (besides new releases which are promply fixes) are some multiplayer games with anti-cheat that intentionally breaks under Linux…

Here's my report: 1. Overwatch -> works great in Proton, albeit about 20% slower than Windows 2. Factorio -> works great natively on Linux, maybe even better 3. Warframe -> works okay in Proton but crashes sometimes 4. Call of Duty (recent) -> kernel anti-cheat both fails to stop cheaters and refuses to work on Linux I tried living the Proton lifestyle for about 2 years, from around 2019 to around late 2021. Then I j…

As a counterexample, I switched to Linux in 2013 for all use cases, gaming included, and haven't looked back. Many of my favorite games do have native Linux builds, but I've had little issue with those that don't.

Re: VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

#62

Post by Zhyl »

mtndew4brkfst wrote: post #21
account42 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is great but would need to run on windows for the typical mumble use-case of gaming. You can game on Linux just fine.

You can certainly play a number of popular and/or high quality games on Linux, but it's hardly ubiquitous. If you're interested in a given specific game I would say your odds of it having a viable Linux experience are worse than 50/50 yet, and if it's a AAA title I'd say it's closer to 10-25% IME. If not for Valve/SteamDeck this would be even more dire, and many of those experiences are still emulation-based i.e. Pro…

We can probably cut this back and forth short just by linking to ProtonDB [0] and AreWeAntiCheatYet [1].

[0] https://ProtonDB.com

[1] https://AreWeAntiCheatYet.com

The Steam top 1000 games:

Rating System: ProtonDB Medals

29% Platinum

47% Gold

11% Silver

3% Bronze

4% Borked

In aggregate:

76% P+G (Games you can just play)

86% P+G+S (Games you can play with minor tweaks)

Anticheat:

154 Supported (45%)

39 Running (12%)

3 Planned (1%)

118 Broken (35%)

25 Denied (7%)

Re: VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

#63

Post by ranger_danger »

d-z-m wrote: post #44

> You have to verify downloaded tarballs authenticity to be sure that you retrieved trusted and untampered software. I'm not able to access the site over TLS, so this is currently impossible. Anyone else have better luck? (from the installation instructions) $ [fetch|wget] http://www.vors.stargrave.org/download/. vors-2.3.0.tar.zst $ [fetch|wget] http://www.vors.stargrave.org/download/vors-2.3.0.tar.zst.sig [verify s…

Most websites these days use Crimeflare or equivalent already anyways which is a MITM proxy, so you're still not safe there either.

Re: VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

#64

Post by lxgr »

vel0city wrote: post #53
thfuran wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cell phone audio traditionally only covered 300Hz-3.4kHz before being lossily compressed down to 4kbps (or sometimes higher, depending on network, load in that service area, etc). That is complete shit. Recently, there have been other protocols adopted with greater bandwidth (all the way up to 7kHz, which is still several khz short of covering all the content of speech, but considerably less terrible) and less compre…

G.711, the standard encoding for home phone systems since they went digital, is usually filtered at 300–3400Hz as well. Chances are if you had a home phone in the 80s or 90s it was filtered at 300-3400Hz somewhere along the path.

And the history of that filtering even predates digital lines, due to frequency multiplexing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-carrier

Re: VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

#65

Post by tarxvf »

thfuran wrote: post #30
uyzstvqs wrote: post #15

> users tend to complain about [Mumble's] newer client versions quality and convenience. I have never heard anyone complain about Mumble's UX. Especially not that it has gotten worse. Or it's resource usage, which is practically unnoticeable on any average system sold past 2005. It's the best-in-class and has only gotten better.

And even if I had, I'm quite sure they wouldn't have meant they wanted it in the terminal instead.

Well cover me in foil and charge extra, I guess I'm rare.

Why would I ever want a GUI for a voice application?

Re: VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

#66

Post by Karrot_Kream »

ekr____ wrote: post #31
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The project just mentions WebRTC as bloated, it's not WebRTC compatible at all. WebTransport isn't there yet so browsers are hamstrung by not having access to real sockets.

Of course, WebTransport also isn't real sockets. It's more like WebSockets but with more modern transport semantics such as unreliable data and multiplexing without head of line blocking (as long as it's run over QUIC). For security reasons, browsers don't allow Web sites access to raw TCP or UDP sockets.

Yeah I was being a bit sloppy equivocating the two. WebTransport gives QUIC based messaging in the browser but not TCP/UDP.

Re: VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

#67

Post by Karrot_Kream »

lxgr wrote: post #37

> WebRTC-based solutions are insane bloated incredible monsters [...] They work mainly only if you use the same kind of software and codecs, for example Chromium[...] That's just not true anymore these days. I've used WebRTC between Firefox, Safari, and Chrome without any issues. > only if you use the same kind of software and codecs, for example Chromium, that requires dozens of gigabytes of disk space and much RAM,…

I'm generally not a person who rails at bloat, but WebRTC is definitely a package. It's a suite of SIP, SRTP, ICE, STUN, TURN, and codecs to do voice/video calls. This makes it versatile and seamless but yes also heavy and opinionated. A good example is just how few blessed ways there are to use WebRTC outside of the browser.

Re: VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

#68

Post by Sean-Der »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #67
lxgr wrote: post #37

> WebRTC-based solutions are insane bloated incredible monsters [...] They work mainly only if you use the same kind of software and codecs, for example Chromium[...] That's just not true anymore these days. I've used WebRTC between Firefox, Safari, and Chrome without any issues. > only if you use the same kind of software and codecs, for example Chromium, that requires dozens of gigabytes of disk space and much RAM,…

I'm generally not a person who rails at bloat, but WebRTC is definitely a package. It's a suite of SIP, SRTP, ICE, STUN, TURN, and codecs to do voice/video calls. This makes it versatile and seamless but yes also heavy and opinionated. A good example is just how few blessed ways there are to use WebRTC outside of the browser.

What makes something a 'blessed way'? Are you looking for community support, large corporate users etc..? Not being snarky, curious about how people see the space. Lots of implementations exist and I have used most of them for different projects, not all these projects went to production though.

* https://github.com/elixir-webrtc (Elixir)

* https://github.com/pion/webrtc (Golang)

* https://github.com/webrtc-rs/webrtc (Rust)

* https://github.com/algesten/str0m (Rust)

* https://github.com/sepfy/libpeer (C/Embedded)

* https://github.com/awslabs/amazon-kinesis-video-streams-webr... (C/Embedded)

* https://github.com/paullouisageneau/libdatachannel (C++)

* https://webrtc.googlesource.com/src/ (C++)

* https://github.com/shinyoshiaki/werift-webrtc (Typescript)

* https://github.com/sipsorcery-org/sipsorcery (C#)

* https://github.com/aiortc/aiortc (Python)

* GStreamer’s webrtcbin (C)

Re: VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

#69

Post by lxgr »

j45 wrote: post #33
lhamil64 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if it was more of an issue with the mic and/or mic placement on phones? Old landline phones had a large mic right by your mouth, whereas cell phones have little pinhole mics near the bottom of the phone. I feel like I've actually noticed the opposite. My parents still have a landline, although it's basically VoIP (through their cable company) but it's connected to the analog lines in their house. I've notice…

It’s different audio codecs and data connections which can be changed and adjusted. Voice over mobile data will benefit from a different type of data compression relative to how data packets are handled in a cellular radio vs a wired internet. The landline service could be as clear or clearer than mobile data, it just isn’t configured to do so in your case. I have seen VoIP setups using a high quality codec and a han…

I'd not really call it different packet handling (except for some of the earlier, mostly 2G ones not providing FEC at lower layers and delegating some level of error concealing to the codec, as far as I remember):

The main difference is that the bandwidth available was just much lower, so mobile codecs are compressed more. (Satellite phones take this to the extreme – 2.4 kbps is a typical data rate after compression there!)

But so were e.g. international trunk lines; they squeezed a lot more than one voice channel into 64 kbps using compression, silence suppression etc.

> The landline service could be as clear or clearer than mobile data, it just isn’t configured to do so in your case.

An analog landline has relatively little chance of ever gaining wideband support, since that would require swapping out line cards at the provider, and the trend seems to be to get rid of these entirely (in favor of a VoIP adapter in the CPE).

I think I've once used "HD voice" on a "landline" when calling a mobile phone, but that only worked because my home router was actually doing SIP in the background.

Re: VoRS: Vo(IP) Simple Alternative to Mumble

#70

Post by Karrot_Kream »

Sean-Der wrote: post #68
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm generally not a person who rails at bloat, but WebRTC is definitely a package. It's a suite of SIP, SRTP, ICE, STUN, TURN, and codecs to do voice/video calls. This makes it versatile and seamless but yes also heavy and opinionated. A good example is just how few blessed ways there are to use WebRTC outside of the browser.

What makes something a 'blessed way'? Are you looking for community support, large corporate users etc..? Not being snarky, curious about how people see the space. Lots of implementations exist and I have used most of them for different projects, not all these projects went to production though. * https://github.com/elixir-webrtc (Elixir) * https://github.com/pion/webrtc (Golang) * https://github.com/webrtc-rs/webrtc…

> Are you looking for community support, large corporate users etc..?

Lots of documentation and demonstrations. And honestly, probably a bit better SEO or maybe searching on my part. For some reason GStreamer's webrtcbin totally flew under my radar.

Also not trying to be snarky/negative about WebRTC. I think it's fantastic at what it does. But as a tinkerer, I want something with more tinkering surface area. Not to detract from the great work on WebRTC and how accessible it's made low-latency streaming.

Post reply on HN