; Summary_Panopto_Echo_Tegrity_Lectopia_20100304
Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out
Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>



  • pg 1
									Summary: Panopto, Echo, Tegrity, Lectopia

                       Panopto         Echo360          Tegrity                 Lectopia

Node administration    (promised by    (December at   - (Promised but        +
                       July)           earliest)        unrealistic given our
                                                        experience with the
                                                        company in testing

Software (portable)    +                                                     

Hardware               +              +               -                      +

High quality capture   +              -                                      
Web-based editing      -              +               -                      
for faculty

Live streaming         +              (possible for   -                      

Web-based              -              +                                      
scheduling for

Web-based signal       -              +                                      
monitoring for

Fully-featured         -                              -                      +
toolset for site

Robust signal          -              +                                      +
monitoring for site
Multispeed             (possible for an    (possible for       +                  +
playback               upcoming release)    December)

Overall product        +                                       -                  

Self Service upload,                        (possible for                         +
transcoding, &                              December)

Publishing API                             +                                      
Scheduling API                             +                                      
Device API (i.e.,      -                   +                                      

Notetaking             +                                                          
Ability to scale for   [no large                                                   +
large deployments      deployments as yet
                       but company feels
                       confident this is

Customizable           -                   -                   -                  +
delivery options

Key Strengths
    1. Ability to capture high quality video/ VGA via PCs with capture cards
    2. Surprisingly good functionality for remote recorders. Easy to set up compared to Lectopia
    3. Software recorder is solid and easy to use. Should be fine for faculty.
    4. Encountered fewest issues/ bugs with Panopto than with either of the other tools. Excellent
       support site with how-to videos. This tool may be easiest to support of the three choices.*
    5. Live streaming
    6. Note-taking functionality likely to be a huge value add
   7. Company is highly responsive and eager to work with us.

   *The wildcard with this is that Panopto is much more bare-bones than the other products. It remains to be seen if they
   can maintain this reliability once they start implementing all the features we’re asking for. Along with this, we’d likely be
   beta testers for much of the new functionality we’re asking them to implement

Key Drawbacks
   1. Minimal features designed for administration of large lecture capture deployments. We would
      be helping them venture into new territory. For example, Panopto indicated no one had ever
      requested the ability to associate recordings with terms or to configure multiple terms in the
      system (!) Currently there are no deployments of Panopto at Duke’s scale.
            Limited signal monitoring capabilities
            Limited system alert options
            No availability windows (defining when recordings become available)
   2. Windows Media architecture would require a substantial shift in back end infrastructure as well
      as in the archival philosophy we’ve propagated under DukeCapture and DukeStream
   3. Current editor is virtually unusable, and certainly too challenging for faculty to use. (They have
      said a revamp is coming soon.)
   4. Panopto’s interfaces (user and admin) are likely to be perceived as plain in comparison to other
      products we’ve demo-ed for the community (such as MediaSite, Echo, and Accordent).
   5. Configuration of PCs may be easier than Lectopia digitiser PCs, but will definitely require more
      maintenance than Echo capture appliances
   6. Lack of customizable export options. Our user community values this feature in Lectopia.
   7. No integration API available for custom web publishing
   8. No multispeed playback at present in Silverlight

Key Strengths
   1. Fully featured compared to the other products from an administration standpoint (node
      administration aside)
   2. Excellent signal monitoring capabilities for administrators.
   3. Echo Flash player is attractive, solid across browsers, and would likely be perceived as a big step
      up from Lectopia
   4. Faculty can log into the appliance to confirm recordings are taking place
   5. H.264-based infrastructure is in line with current archival strategies
   6. Faculty can create ad hoc recordings on the appliance. Panopto offers this feature as well, but it
      is less usable from a faculty perspective.
   7. Editing tools are clearly best of the 3 products, and easy enough for faculty to use.
   8. Rumor that prices are being significantly cut. Not yet announced publicly.
   9. Integration APIs offer a way to pull content into Duke web portals in interesting ways
   10. Would allow us to preserve our investment in nearly 40 capture appliances

Key Drawbacks
   1. Lack of node administration. Not expected until 2.7 (late 2010)
   2. Lack of high quality capture options in current generation of appliance
   3. There is a history of poor communication and lack of responsiveness to our needs from the
      business/ administrative unit in the company. Others we’ve talked to said this was a problem
      for them as well. In particular missed deadlines for promised features is a big concern.
   4. Lack of customizable delivery options
   5. Lack of self-service transcoding infrastructure (Australian community listed this as #1 feature, so
      it’s likely they’ll feel pressed to implement)
   6. Fairly buggy compared with Panopto. On par with Lectopia in this regard. Better than Tegrity,
      for sure.
   7. No multispeed playback, though on roadmap
   8. Server administration, while better than Tegrity and Panopto, isn’t as good in many areas as
      Lectopia. Enhancements are promised in 2.7

Key Strengths
   1. Software-only model could be easier to support.

   2. Has an impressive list of features, including iPhone player, Facebook integration, integrated chat

   3. Only tool successfully implementing multispeed playback of the 3 products tested

   4. Integration API is high priority roadmap item

Key Drawbacks
   1. Software only model may create the impression of a less fully featured product.
   2. Appliance model is not fully baked. Major issues with how the software interacts with device
   3. Very limited monitoring capability for recordings in progress
   4. Exceptionally buggy across almost all features tested
   5. Windows Media architecture would require a substantial shift in back end infrastructure as well
      as in the archival philosophy we’ve propagated under DukeCapture and DukeStream
   6. User interfaces on admin side are poorly designed, disorganized
   7. Not clear they could deliver on node administration
   8. Admin interface very slow compared to other two products
9. Rumor is that “their entire engineering department quit” (!)
10. Player is not compatible across a reasonable range of browsers
11. Live streaming not well implemented in Tegrity (currently requires separate application called
    Tegrity Live Client)

To top