Re: TAPI and .NET
From: Grant Schenck (schenckg_at_optonline.net)
Date: 10/21/04
- Next message: Fred: "Re: Multiple modems on same machine for IVRS"
- Previous message: Andreas Marschall [MVP TAPI]: "Re: Cannot hangup modem after incoming call"
- In reply to: Andreas Marschall [MVP TAPI]: "Re: TAPI and .NET"
- Next in thread: Andreas Marschall [MVP TAPI]: "Re: TAPI and .NET"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:54:38 -0400
I'm with you two. TAPI 2.x is the only solution to consider for any
non-trivial application. TAPI 3.x is probably fine for single line
dialers but not much more. If you are serious about trying to build
CallCenter IVR/ACD type solutions using TAPI then 2.x is really the
only option. The various issues with TAPI 3.x (the lack of support
for private TSP extensions is a killer) make it unacceptable.
-- Grant Schenck Grant Schenck Software schenckg@optonline.net http://grantschenck.tripod.com "Andreas Marschall [MVP TAPI]" <Andreas.Marschall@I-B-A-M.de> wrote in message news:u#PN2$ttEHA.3384@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > "William DePalo [MVP VC++]" <willd.no.spam@mvps.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > news:eQYnsattEHA.1308@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > > "Andreas Marschall [MVP TAPI]" <Andreas.Marschall@I-B-A-M.de> wrote in > > message news:%239VNL7ptEHA.220@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > > > thanks for your comments on Bishoy's posting. > > > > No problem. Realize, though, that my motives are not entirely altrusitic. > > <g> > > > > You see, there is no one here who offers _more_ free, high-quality advice > > than you. There is no one here who takes the time to read _every_ post and > > offer constructive critiscism when someone else makes a mistake (as I have > > done once). So I don't want anyone to try to stifle you (or anyone else) who > > has got something to say from which I can learn just because the answer is > > one that they didn't want to hear. > > > > Keep up the good work! And thanks. > > Thank you very much, Will. > And be sure that I'll keep on going. > Some negative feedback from very few posters doesn't count compared to the > vast majority of encouraging positive replies. > > > > [And on the subject matter, I'd say the KB article is right-on as far as it > > goes. I'd make stronger statements. Never use TAPI3 for anything non-trivial > > as it is much less capable than TAPI2. That makes the RCW issue a moot > > point. And if one targets the .Net platform use the Platform Invoke (aka > > P/Invoke) method to access TAPI2 from a CLS compliant language. I have an > > IVR which does just that and allows me to build applications in > > C#/VB.Net/J#/JScript.Net and Managed Extensions for C++). Of course, that's > > just my opinion.] > > I strongly agree on the TAPI2 vs TAPI3 statement. > See my TAPI and TSPI FAQ: > > Q: Has TAPI3 any advantages over TAPI2 ? > http://www.i-b-a-m.de/Andreas_Marschall's_TAPI_and_TSPI_FAQ.htm#_Q:_Ha s_TAPI3_1 > > Q: Has TAPI3 any disadvantages over TAPI2 ? > http://www.i-b-a-m.de/Andreas_Marschall's_TAPI_and_TSPI_FAQ.htm#_Q:_Ha s_TAPI3 > > -- > Best Regards > Andreas Marschall > Microsoft MVP for TAPI / Windows SDK > TAPI / TSP Developer and Tester > http://www.I-B-A-M.de/Andreas_Marschall's_TAPI_and_TSPI_FAQ.htm > * Please post all messages and replies to the newsgroup so all may > * benefit from the discussion. Private mail is usually not replied to. > * This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. > > >
- Next message: Fred: "Re: Multiple modems on same machine for IVRS"
- Previous message: Andreas Marschall [MVP TAPI]: "Re: Cannot hangup modem after incoming call"
- In reply to: Andreas Marschall [MVP TAPI]: "Re: TAPI and .NET"
- Next in thread: Andreas Marschall [MVP TAPI]: "Re: TAPI and .NET"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
