Our church already has a server the prime purposes of which are:

1. to support our extensive "library" web site (5+ gig of downloadable audio video and text items)

2. Provide for audio and video conferencing

.

It is currently running a microsoft OS and is using a no longer supported version of Helix server for the conferencing & streaming functions.

The only reason for the microsoft OS is because it was the only way we could get the helix server to function and even then we have been plagued with problems.

We would like to consider going to linux and using something else for at least audio, and maybe video conferencing. Two way communication is necessary. At the present time 10 to 15 participants would suffice. We also have bandwith limitations at our available server location so low bandwidth demands are preferable. Latency would be a key concern.

QUESTION
What recommendations for OS and software can you reccomend given that our linux experience is probably minimal for the task and we are looking at zero to moderate cost for the change?

For the moment it seems that our best route for making the changeover would be to install the linux as a dual boot situation until we could shake down the new system

Helix seems to be dead.

You might want to take a look at Mumble. It's extremely popular among the Linux podcasting community.

http://www.mumble.com/

Linux Basix has a good tutorial on how to set it up. It's about how to set it for Linux Basix, but it will give you a good idea of how it works.

http://linuxbasix.com/tiki-index.php...x+Basix+Mumble

Frank
Mumble looks like a whole lot more than we want. We are looking for a situation on line where
-- partcipants access our server
-- all participants can talk to one another as an electronic equivalent of sitting around one table
-- 10 to 15 participants would be plenty at this time

-- The moderator being able to mute all lines but his own while making preliminary announcements would be highly desirable

-- More than a one time fee to acquire the software is objectionable.
-- If it works we probably would not bother to upgrade it
-- we will not tolerate being forced to upgrade it to keep on using it.
-- participants will be far less computer savy than our own not so adept skill level so preferably users would be able to access it with nothing more complex than their browser.


-- other features might be interesting especially if we have overlooked some problem in our scheme, but for the most part we probably would not use extra or advanced features.