Re: Cisco's position on the WebRTC API

On Jul 23, 2013 10:14 PM, "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On Jul 23, 2013, at 10:34 PM, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> wrote:
>
> > Nice try, but your un-Googley colors are a dead give away.  You'll need
to try harder next time :).
>
> dang :-)
>
> >
> > Seriously, could you provide more information about the developers you
spoke to, what you asked, what their responses were?  Better yet, could you
ask them to come to the list and express their thoughts firsthand?  I think
the more (good) firsthand input we have, the better.  No offense, but I
would find that much more valuable than your second-hand, un-detailed
summary.
>
> No offense taken and I complete understand that any message filtered
through any given person has to be viewed with some skepticism. That
combined with some of these companies are still in stealth mode about what
they are doing makes me very hesitant to provide lists of who I spoke to.
And of course that just adds to the skepticism you should have for this
information.

I completely understand respecting peoples' privacy, so I don't expect you
to say more than you should.  And I'm glad that you understand that if you
can't say more, then I have to take the conclusions with some skepticism.

And I admit: when you say "I asked a room of people using the API if they
would change anything, and they said nothing", I am skeptical.  To me, it's
like asking a teenager with an old, beat up car if he'd like to drive
something nicer and he says "no mine's fine".  Maybe he's polite and
thankful he can drive anything at all (I am!), but who's really going to
say no to a nicer car?


>
> But there is one very important things that I did do multiple times. I
encouraged anyone who thought there was something lacking in the current
API to send email to the lists. I said this to many people I talked to, I
said it in all my presentations, I have it in my slides along with links on
how to do it.  There were google people in the room when I did that and I
suspect were there to hear the responses when we asked about issues in the
plenary. I imagine that other google folks that went to the conference
should get the recordings when they get published and I would guess that
you can review them. They are typically not public as that is how the
conference makes money but anyone can go to the conference.

And you got passed all those Google people to invade the booth?  We'll
definitely need better surveillance next time :).

Seriously, I think its great to encourage developer feedback, so thank you
for doing so.

>
> >
> > On Jul 23, 2013 8:22 PM, "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jul 23, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
wrote:
> > >
> > >> I wasn't at the conference, but I think it would really be helpful
if your complaint here
> > >
> > >
> > > Luckily there were people at the google booth at the conference.
Photo of it attached …
> > >
>