Videoconferencing to Go

As a child of the space age, I’ve got to say that, despite all the recent technological innovation, the 21st century really isn’t turning out to be quite as Buck Rogers whizbang as I imagined back when I was a kid. Contrary to what I was always led to believe from browsing Popular Science, here it is, the spring of 2008, and I still do not own a flying car. Detached garage, yes. Heliport, no. Sadder still, a Google product search has failed to locate a single robotic maid that even comes close to offering the electro-domestic capabilities bundled into the model XB-500 that the Jetsons affectionately referred to as “Rosie.” I find that particularly disappointing. I could use a little Rosie in my life. If you saw the state of my home now, you’d probably agree that a little speech-synthesized back-sassing every now and then would be a small price to pay for a perpetually tidy space pad.

Fortunately, though, a few of the predicted developments foreseen in the sixties have actually come to pass. Well, sort of. I remember watching a television show called The 21st Century in which Walter Cronkite showed me the “videophones” we’d all eventually have hanging on our kitchen walls. Way to go, Walt. Sure enough, here I sit, well-nigh four decades later, writing a review of just such a device on my newfangled “digital typewriter.”

But you don’t have to mount the inPerson videoconferencing unit on your kitchen wall—or anyplace else—for that matter. It’s highly portable, two-hour battery equipped, and WiFi enabled, so you can tote it anywhere in range of wireless Internet access or a 10/100 Ethernet jack. Once your network has been identified, all you have to do is enter the ID of the inPerson unit(s) you’d like to videoconference with, hit the telephone button, and get your video chat session, meeting, or distance-learning session underway. All the required hardware and software is built-in. The unit has AV outputs, so you can cable-connect to a large monitor or projector to accommodate big group meetings. InPerson features a tiltable wide-angle camera and dual microphones with echo-canceling technology to help suppress the cavernous, time-delay audio feedback that can plague online chats. Meeting facilitators need not be tethered to their inPerson units; accessories include a remote control for mobile operation, earbuds for private sessions, and a tripod mount so that you can place your camera in the optimum viewing position.

Oh, I see you’ve noticed the two-ton pachyderm standing in the corner. That elephant in the room appears anytime I discuss the prospect of forking out $700, plus monthly fees, for videoconferencing. So let’s address the obvious question, or he’s not going to go away. Why should I pay for a dedicated videoconferencing unit and an associated service, when I can do it on my existing, webcam-equipped computer for free?

As you, I, and the elephant know, it’s a valid question. If you’re not familiar with the expanding menu of no-cost and low-cost, mostly Web-based, videoconferencing solutions out there, I suggest you revisit Steve Hargadon’s excellent overview of several of them in the SLJ article “Let’s Meet Online” (April 2008, p. 23). Personally, I love Skype and have been video-chatting on it, happily and fee free, for a while. So why consider a dedicated device to do essentially the same thing?

As I’ve found from circulating laptops through my library, people aren’t always comfortable with personal computers they don’t use every day. Plus, the typical school year includes a lot of down time. Stand-alone machines that don’t receive regular updates and maintenance by a single, custodial user can lead to frustrating technology snafus that would be particularly embarrassing when at least one other person is waiting cluelessly on the other end of the connection. If videoconferencing, for distance learning or otherwise, is something your school has invested in, it’d be hard to beat the reliability that inPerson offers, even if it costs a bit more. With inPerson, once you’re set up, connection is a single keystroke away.

Is the video quality better than you’d expect using a PC-based webcam on the same network? After trying the device on a couple of different networks, I found that the picture was no better than what I get from Skype, Yahoo! Chat, or most other free services, though the sound quality may have a bit of an edge. Other disadvantages to videoconferencing on the dedicated inPerson station include not being able to share files via the device. Another caveat: inPerson allows users to conference with PC-based webcam users, too, a big plus that opens things up a bit—in theory. But the Web-based app for doing so, still in Beta, requires an inherently dicey ActiveX plug-in, which is only supported through Internet Explorer and has a time limit of one hour per session. If you can get it to work, that is, which I could not.

To find out if inPerson is a good fit for your school’s videoconferencing needs, visit their site and log in to slj.com to see my video of the unit in action. Email me and let me know what you think. And, if you have a lead on cheap, capable robotic maids, definitely fill me in on that, too.
See the video version of this review.

Creative Labs, Inc. $699 per unit. Accessories pack: $79. Basic one-to-one conferencing service: $10 per month. Add an additional $5 per month for multi-point conferencing (up to four participants) plus a five-cent per minute charge to the initializing caller. inperson.creative.com.