Loading sub-menu...

Galicaster and Matterhorn, the best match (new)

Version 15 by developer
on sep 28, 2011 18:24.

<< Changes from 14 to 15

compared with

Version 16 by developer
on sep 28, 2011 18:39.

Changes from 16 to 17 >>

Key

This line was removed.

This word was removed. This word was added.

This line was added.

Changes (7)

View Page History

...

Every/Any Galicaster application acts as basics Matterhorn capture agent. It can register as a capture agent, thus being able to receive scheduled recordings and ingest the resulting mediapackages automatically. The main differences with standard Matterhorn capturers is that Galicaster has *graphic interface*, it can be *controlled manually*, it's very *easy to reingest media* and provide *operativity to manage media* such as play, edit metadata, search recordings, and bulk deleting, very useful when dozens of lectures were recorded. \[{color:#ff0000}review last sentence{color}\]

While conected, GClass will communicate with the Matterhorn server, receive scheduled events and return completed recordings. All with the certainty of both and video properly recorde.

{column}
{column:width=2%}

...

h3. Major scalability: University of Vigo pilot

One o

As responsibles of the University of Vigo multimedia content management we have seen increase the number of hours gradually and the tendency it's to record most of the lectures of the degrees and some of the bachelors, as well as a good portion of the conferences hosted on every one of our three campus.

Galicaster it's designed to record all day lecture after lecture, to do it we need a powerfull machine. Why waste this potential all night long

\[Talk about how the interval between recording and publishing has shinrken at same time\]