Re: [rtcweb] Use Case draft

Tim Panton <> Tue, 01 May 2012 09:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA2D121F8718 for <>; Tue, 1 May 2012 02:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.979
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.620, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_LWSHORTT=1.24]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n2b+BT3laz9Q for <>; Tue, 1 May 2012 02:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0577221F8713 for <>; Tue, 1 May 2012 02:04:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (unknown []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3B2C37A90A; Tue, 1 May 2012 10:13:19 +0100 (BST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Tim Panton <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 10:04:20 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Stephan Wenger <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
Cc: Randell Jesup <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Use Case draft
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 09:04:14 -0000

To be a little clearer. 
If what the use case describes is a 1-for-1 replacement of an (0)800 number with a
rtcWeb call, (no context share, no leveraging of web identity) into a 
standard current call center. I don't think that this case is worthwhile to add.

If the usecase describes how context sharing, web identity might be used in
a call center scenario - I'm all for it. 

All I am saying is that if rtcWeb doesn't add any user benefits over (0)800 then,
based on my experience, almost no one will use it. So we should not allow
the like-for-like replacement case to unduly set requirements

On 30 Apr 2012, at 23:27, Stephan Wenger wrote:

> Hi Randell,
> I don't buy this argument.
> Speakers are a standard piece of equipment now; almost everyone with a PC
> has them in some form.  Without a webcam, webrtc would be pretty useless,
> and every webcam nowadays has a microphone.
> I have no reason to distrust Tim's assessment, but the reason for the lack
> of success of PC facilitated sales doers you cited, IMO, cannot be the
> main reason, and certainly not among the expected users of webrtc (who
> WILL have speakers, camera and mic set up, ready to go, and used to make
> calls from their machine).  And if your argument refers to the call center
> site--well, those guys will get their equipment right and train their
> employees, or go out of business.
> Lets not dismiss a use case based on short term observations.
> Stephan
> On 4.30.2012 23:09 , "Randell Jesup" <> wrote:
>> On 4/30/2012 9:54 AM, Tim Panton wrote:
>>> On 30 Apr 2012, at 09:42, Ravindran, Parthasarathi wrote:
>>>> My experience is different. Click-to-call is attractive in case of
>>>> toll-free number in the site. WebRTC provides complete free call
>>>> without any toll.
>>> I can't tell you the actual numbers, but when presented with the choice
>>> of calling a toll free number
>>> or clicking a button marked "free internet call" - almost no-one on a
>>> real, busy site clicked the button.
>>> ( for every button click there were several orders of magnitude more
>>> 0800 calls from that page).
>>> So from my perspective this is a legacy interop use case with almost
>>> zero user acceptance.
>> How many people browsing have mic, speakers, or headphones, set up, and
>> are comfortable with it?
>> Things are changing, but a friend who consults for non-tech small
>> businesspeople and individual home-based businesses avoids using audio
>> when doing screen-share type stuff and instead starts a parallel audio
>> POTS call, because it's too frequently a waste of time for them to find
>> and set up headphones, get their mic to work.
>> If it's people who are already using Skype/etc, there's a better chance
>> - but they still may only be comfortable with Skype for "calls".
>> -- 
>> Randell Jesup
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list