<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Sevana Oy Blog &#187; different</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.sevana.fi/tag/different/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.sevana.fi</link>
	<description>The Sevana Product Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 05:22:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Who&#8217;s the main competitor to the new method? What&#8217;s the catch?</title>
		<link>http://blog.sevana.fi/whos-the-main-competitor-to-the-new-method-whats-the-catch/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.sevana.fi/whos-the-main-competitor-to-the-new-method-whats-the-catch/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 05:14:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Voice and Sound Quality Testing Software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[approach]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[automated]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[automatically]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comparison]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[different]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dll]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Evaluation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[files]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mean Opinion Score]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[method]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[P.862]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Perceptual]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[qoe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[qos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[quality of service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[test]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[testing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vqt]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wordpress.sevana.fi/?p=72</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The solution we are talking about in these posts is DIFFERENT and gives added value to other products as it is not the so-called QoE (Quality of Experience) and does not rely on real-time user input, and it is neither based on MOS (Mean Opinion Score), nor operational parameters. The product in question IS different [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The solution we are talking about in these posts is DIFFERENT and gives added value to other products as it is not the so-called QoE (Quality of Experience) and does not rely on real-time user input, and it is neither based on MOS (Mean Opinion Score), nor operational parameters. The product in question IS different and covers a specific area, BEFORE any product is integrated and BEFORE one gets to the user experience and one can easily integrate it to a large system as a DLL library for instance. Or, if you have a system already operating you gain two big advantages: 1. generate a specch model to evaluate voice quality provided by your system and 2. test it on the fly by just simple audio files comparison.</p>
<p>It seems quite reasonable that the major competitor for the method is ITU P.862 &#8211; the so-called PESQ, but if you google it you will find out that there are just few World leaders that have this method implemented in their systems and&#8230; even fewer those who has actually done in-house as the majority would be using the same technology provider. (Just google it!)</p>
<p>Ok, what&#8217;s the catch? Price is one of them obviously and in order to get a better understanding on that please refer to this presentation (http://www.sevana.fi/Automatic_Sound_Signals_Quality_Estimation_Business_Benefits.pdf), but that&#8217;s not all. If one tries to compare PESQ and the method in question he would find out quite interesting differences and advantages in favor of the new method. But let&#8217;s leave it for the next post to digest the information better. See you reading our next post!</p>
<p><a class="a2a_dd addtoany_share_save" href="http://www.addtoany.com/share_save"><img src="http://blog.sevana.fi/wp-content/plugins/add-to-any/share_save_171_16.png" width="171" height="16" alt="Share"/></a> </p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.sevana.fi/whos-the-main-competitor-to-the-new-method-whats-the-catch/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

