Hi, here's my question:
Why does video conferencing suck? Is it because the technology doesn't
deliever what it promises - ie a facsimile of a round-table meeting
for all participants - or is there some inherant flaw in video
conferencing that means it will never be as good as meeting in person?
I suspect the technology cannot accurately reproduce the nuances of
human communication, particularly the body language and slight
intonations of non-verbal communication. Would we be better just
communicating via email and memo?

---

Request for Question Clarification by techtor-ga on 17 Mar 2003 01:40 PST

Your question seems largely dependent on opinion. You might be writing
a report on paper on why videoconferencing is not advisable. Would you
like me to just show you websites that show the downsides and limits
of videoconferencing to be your sources?

---

Clarification of Question by crocokoala-ga on 17 Mar 2003 14:33 PST

Dear Techtor-ga

I'm not writing a report or anything, but have had some experience of
videoconferencing and am curious about it. The crux of my question is:
with the right technology (bandwidth, screens etc) can
videoconferencing do a passable job of emulating a real physical
meeting, or is there some psychological impediment to decent
conversation that cannot be overcome? Or, is there some intangible
benefit of holding a videoconference rather than talking over the
phone or sending emails?

I guess I'm after some general comments and anything you can find that
looks at videoconferencing from a sociological/psychological
perspective

thanks again

---

Request for Question Clarification by techtor-ga on 17 Mar 2003 22:44 PST

If I find any opinion or research about the advantages and
disadvantages of videocnferencing, will that do? I'll see what I can
pick from the Net.

---

Clarification of Question by crocokoala-ga on 18 Mar 2003 14:34 PST

Yeah, that would be fine - anything that isn't product information
from manufacturers of the stuff

thanks

Hello Crocokoala,

My answer may not exactly show why video conferencing sucks per se,
but I do try list all the possible shortcomings and disadvantages in
support of your idea. Probably they will how video conferencing
"sucks".
I’ve found a lot of pages and sites on the Net that show results of
video conferencing tests in the class room environment. There seem to
be mixed results, but the disadvantages are more or less the same in
many cases, summed up here in my own words (none of these are from any
product manufacturers):

- Person-to-person interaction is at a reduced level, not just because
of reduced body language, but because even sound quality is affected,
and participants can get distracted fiddling with the equipment.
- Cost. You need money to set up a good system. Good equipment is
still expensive.
- Here’s a good term: Technical problems. Susceptibility to
interference, power failures, malfunctioning equipment, and other such
problems. Certainly a video conference will be disrupted by such
events. And there is a delay in the signal reaching the receiving end
because of the bandwidth of the connection. Hence the "stop-motion"
effect of monitor video input. Meeting someone in person doesn't have
these problems.
- I think it certainly isn't round-table, since most formal meetings
would have a moderator to manage the meeting.
- Setting up the equipment and meeting schedule needs a lot of
preparation.


SOURCES (some with quoted text):
Distance Education & New Convergent Technologies - 1: Video
Conferencing
Steve Wheeler 
Training Manager 
Ratio Project 
University Of Plymouth
http://www.fae.plym.ac.uk/tele/bcs1.html

Meeting Face to Face: Pros and Cons (has something on video
conferencing too)
http://www.eventageous.com/planning_guides/meetingf2fplain.html

Stratcomm: Videoconferencing
http://www.strategiccomm.com/videoconf.html

Video Conferencing as a Tool to Link Colleges of Education
with K-12 Schools: A P3T3 Project Initiative (school study)
http://www.aace.org/conf/site/pt3/paper_3008_275.pdf
Text quoted:
(1) IP-based video conferencing equipment
requires access through the school's Internet firewall. School
technicians must make the necessary arrangements, which
can be time-consuming and difficult if the school's technical support
staff is not fully knowledgeable about firewalls.
(2) Video conferencing over the Internet requires high bandwidth
(typically 128 Kbps or better) to insure a stable
connection of acceptable quality. Network traffic can lead to
degradation or even interruption of the connection.
(3)
This is a new way of communicating for most people. Participants have
to take time in the beginning to get used to the
technology and become comfortable in using it. 
(4) Audio problems can limit observations and interactions. Typical
classroom noise makes it difficult for pre-service teachers to listen
to particular conversations in a busy classroom. This
is not usually a technical problem per se, but it can cause problems.

National Radio Astronomy Observatory - 3 Conference Room Use
http://www.cv.nrao.edu/~abridle/videorole/3Conference_Room_Use.shtml

Video conferencing in the classroom - Case studies by British
Educational Communications and Technology Agency
http://www.becta.org.uk/technology/vc/vc_classroom/

Monash University - EDF 229 presentation slide
http://www.education.monash.edu.au/units/edf3229/lec8/32298/sld010.htm
- Text quoted:
Disadvantages of Desktop Video Conferencing (in a school setting)
1. Poor technical quality
2. Can be difficult to arrange conference
3. Adult use of DVC and web cams can be unsuitable for school 
4. Can replace real experiences
5. Limited experience in schools 

So in conclusion, video conferencing certainly cannot replace meeting
people in person in many cases. It can be applicable to only a limited
range of situations. If some participants of a meeting cannot go to a
certain venue, they may use video conferencing as an alternative.
However their influence in the meeting might be reduced because of the
limitations explained above. Well, I'd say in my humble opinion that
video conferencing has its place, but not as a first-line solution.

Search terms used on Google:
Video conferencing disadvantages
Video conferencing shortcomings
video conference disadvantages
video conference shortcomings

I hope this is a helpful answer. Don’t be afraid to post a
clarification if you need any. Thanks.

Thanks very much, that's a great help.

I think that there is a lot of room for improvement in this
technology.  In the US, there doesn't seem to be a major push to
develop it more quickly because of the low usage, which means is more
costly (per person).  Since it is costly, there is low usage, and
therefore less investment.  It's  a viscioius circle that will be
broken by a major demand for it for some reason in the future.

For now, I agree with you that it is less than desirable, and then it
is expensive. Might as well fly!

Claudietta

Thanks very much too for the 5-star rating! We are glad to have been
of service to you. :)

Techtor

The biggest reason they suck is lack of "quality of service" (or QoS)
provided by ISPs on the Internet.    If everyone had an Internet2
connection (which is the network that is dedicated to academic &
research institutions), it would be a different story.   Internet2 has
QoS throughout, plus all its participants have high bandwidth
connections (a minimum of 45 megabits in most cases).   QoS is a
technical term that is used to describe the prioritization of certain
types of Internet traffic (i.e., video in this case) and a guarantee
that your traffic will receive priority and not hit any bottlenecks
along the way.

The "commodity Internet" or "Internet1" (to distinguish it from
Internet2) is too variable in bandwidth capacity throughout, and there
is also no agreement between ISPs on how to prioritize the traffic. 
You can be sure that as the demand for video grows, ISPs will start to
provide QoS for a fee.  Also, new networking technologies will also
help video quality - the ones I have heard the most about are
"multicast" and "access grid."  I know just enough about this to get
myself in trouble (I'm no guru) but I just wanted to give you some of
the terminology that I've run into with videoconferencing as I didn't
see them referenced in this answer.